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.
Today is November 10, 2009. Wikipedia tells me that it is November 11, 2009. Does anyone realize? Can someone do something about it? Am I wrong in that I have to do something in order for it to be November 10? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Samuel Rosenbaum (talk • contribs) 00:21, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Check out Special:Preferences, Date & Time, Time offset. Presumably server time and your local time are different - you're some hours behind the servers, which seem to be on GMT. Different parts of the USA are from 4 to 11 hours behind GMT, meaning it's the 11th in London whilst its still the 10th in the USA. --Tagishsimon(talk)00:28, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's 2pm on the 11th here - I often accidentally enter things on the wrong section of Wikipedia process pages that are arranged by date because I forget the rest of the world is so far behind :) Grutness...wha?01:01, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This is quite an interesting problem for databases. Sometimes people want their local time, sometimes they want a standard time, and other times they want the time of an event at its own location. I've even seen where the date of the event location is used but the time is the local time - so you can have minus hour or 36 hours past. Having a round world is a real problem :) Dmcq (talk) 10:29, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Marx, Lenin, and Stalin
I have three questions to ask you:
1. I have heard that Karl Marx bore an illegitimate son. Is that true?
2. I have heard that Vladimir Lenin contract syphilis from prostitutes. Is that true?
3. I have heard that Joseph Stalin was sued for forcing a sexual relationship upon a singer. Is that true?
For the first one, search for "illegitimate son" on Karl Marx. Googling "lenin syphilis" brings up this article. Googling "stalin assault" and "stalin sexual" doesn't bring up too much that seems specific to a singer, but he was no peach. --Mr.98 (talk) 01:11, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
1. Probably as true or otherwise as the same rumours about Thomas Jefferson. Many sources are apocryphal, or at the least vague. Possibly, but it would be difficult to prove one way or another.
2. It's been suggested, but has not been widely accepted, that Lenin had syphilis. Unlikely, but there is some possibility.
3. Stalin has been rumoured to have had so many affairs and sexual entanglements it's difficult to know where to begin with this one - but such rumours often accompany powerful men, especially ones with (how shall we put it) a darker side. However, I've never heard of him ever having been sued for sexual misconduct. It's possible, but probably not.
Grutness...wha?00:43, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have read the article on Karl Marx on Wikipedia, and it didn't say anything about Karl Marx having an illegitimate son. I read about all those three things in the section Feigning Sincerity and Overtly Agreeing While Covertly Opposing in V. Aspects of the CCP’s Unscrupulous Nature in Part 9: On the Unscrupulous Nature of the Chinese Communist Party in Nine Commentaries On The Communist Party. I want to ask if those three things said there are true. Are those three things said there true? Are they true?
As can be seen from the earlier comments by myself and others, we really don't know and probably no-one really knows for some of them. Did Marx have an illegitimate child? It's impossible to say. Someone may claim that he did, but even through DNA testing it's impossible to be 100% certain (as is the case with Jefferson - it can hint at it one way or the other, but won't tell you whether the results are 100% incontrovertibly reliable). Did Lenin have syphilis? This has been suggested by a researcher in a paper published in 2004, as it says in our article. But trying to diagnose someone so long after their death is fraught with problems and in many cases cannot lead to unanimously acceptable results. There have been papers published proposing possible diagnoses for the mental or physical problems (often undiagnosed during their lifetime) of many famous people, from George II to Einstein to Roosevelt to Tutankhamun. Lenin's case is simply another theory. Whether it gains widespread acceptance is still moot, and even if it does, this does not necessarily mean that it is true. We can never know. Was Stalin sued? This is perghaps more possible of being discovered for a fact, but only if it were true. There's no way of saying "there's no evidence, therefore it's false" - evidence doesn't work that way. You can say "there's evidence, therefore it's true", but if there's no evidence you can do no more than speculate. If it were true, and it happened during Stalin's time in power, and if there were evidence, chances are that that evidence would have been destroyed anyway. But those are two enormous ifs. As far as I am aware, and as far as we've been able to find out, there seems to be no evidence, so the truth or otherwise of the statement remains up in the air. Given that even the most heinous criminals - in most civilised nations - are granted the right of being judged not guilty unless proven guilty by the evidence, it is up to the writer of that statement to show the evidence in order for us to be able to say that it is true. Grutness...wha?06:13, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
(I admit this is a far-fetched question, but it's been bugging me for quite a while. Thanks in advance for any help.)
Oftentimes I find myself away from the television when 18:30 rolls around and the CBS Evening News comes on. I remedy this problem by turning on the radio and tuning to WCBS, which simulcasts the first ten minutes of the show. As a clear channel, WCBS should be audible throughout the eastern part of the U.S. However, oftentimes atmospheric conditions, combined with the terrain in my area, mean the broadcast is not listenable. Though the broadcast supposedly goes out over the network, I am unable to find another CBS Radio affiliate that carries the broadcast.
This brings me to my question: has anyone heard another CBS affiliate carry the broadcast? (I thought of streaming over the Internet, but usually I'm not near the computer either.) Again, thanks in advance: Xenon54 / talk / 01:22, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the quick response. In theory, all CBS-affiliated stations would carry the broadcast, but the reason I'm asking is because this doesn't seem to be the case anymore. Compounding the problem is the fact that CBS' own list (e.g. this one) is several years out of date, therefore hindering the search for other stations that might be in listening range. For example, my local affiliate, WTOP-FM (which carries hourly news bulletins but not the Evening News) is listed on being on 94.3 MHz, which it hasn't been since 1998!
Other CBS O&Os that I have heard - KYW, KDKA, WBZ and WINS - don't carry it either. I'm wondering if WCBS is the only station that still carries the broadcast (which is quite unusual considering it appears to have started with Katie Couric), and if it is not, if anyone has heard the broadcast for themselves on another station. Xenon54 / talk / 02:39, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Efficient Shuffling
Forgive me, I don’t know whether to ask this in the Maths desk or the Computing desk or… So I decided here!
I play a card game where the number of cards in the deck is too large to riffle shuffle. At the end of a game, the top (approx) one-third of the deck is placed back on top of the unused cards and the entire deck now needs to be shuffled. The cards used in the previous game tend to be in “sets” (c.f. Rummy) – therefore the shuffling process should attempt to break up the sets and distribute the cards throughout the deck.
Currently I have been performing four riffles shuffles as follows… Consider the desk as being in 4 parts ABCD (where A and some of B contain the cards used from the previous game). I now riffle shuffle A into D and B into C. Re-stacking the deck into parts PQRS, I again riffle shuffle this time P into R and Q into S.
Question – does this give a reasonable distribution of cards throughout the deck? Is there a more efficient riffle shuffling algorithm for shuffling such a deck? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.208.156.129 (talk) 05:27, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The advantage for riffle shuffling is that it is inefficient. A perfect riffle, whereby you perfectly alternated every single card, would actually be a lousy way to randomize a deck of cards. The reason why riffling works so well is that the cards tend to stick together a bit, and since there are lots of "little stacks" of cards of varying sizes (1 or 2 or 3 cards together), the deck can become quickly randomized; certainly faster than it could via the "overhand" shuffle method. Your method sounds like a fine way to randomize a very large deck where you can't shuffle it all at once. I generally just divide the deck into two smaller, managble stacks, riffle each among itself, then recombine the two decks into one with a few rough overhand shuffles. Then I do the whole procedure again 1 or 2 more times, usually until the banal story I am relating to the other card players is over, or until I am done overanalyzing the play of the last hand. Then I pass out the cards. --Jayron3206:06, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A friend is a dealer at Bay 101, a local cardroom, and in sometimes called upon to deal panguingue, usually called "pan". I know little about the game — it's about old ladies making melds and throwing poker chips at one another.
She says that he accepted way to shuffle the game's 320-card deck is to split it in half and shove and moosh the halves together, lather, rinse, repeat. Perhaps not an efficient shuffle, but the old ladies demand it. PhGustaf (talk) 15:15, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I believe that the best card games come about precisely because the cards aren't perfectly shuffled. Who remembers poker games when everyone gets pairs and triples? Meh! The whole thing somehow becomes much more exciting when people have flushes and straights and four of a kind all over the place like when James Bond plays at the bad guy's casino (and those guys shuffle REALLY badly!) So forget perfect shuffling - fair-but-imperfect is what produces the most exciting game. SteveBaker (talk) 05:29, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Meta-question: where can I find a certain video?
If I am extremely lucky, someone might recognise the video I am thinking of, but more realistically, can you suggest a forum or other location where this sort of question would have better luck?
It is a minute or so, and features only a scrolling screen of text, chunked into relatively short lines. It is read by a young woman. When she gets to the end, the scrolling reverses, and she reads it again, backwards (sometimes inserting a linking word). The first version is pessimistic and the second is optimistic. I can't remember any of the exact phrases (as my Google failure attests) but it was something along these lines:
In 30 years I will be celebrating the tenth anniversary of my divorce.
I refuse to accept that
My pension will be worthless.
The experts tell me that
one person alone cannot change anything.
I know.
So, reversed, and de-chunked:
I know one person alone cannot change anything.
The experts tell me that my pension will be worthless.
I refuse to accept that in 30 years I will be celebrating the tenth anniversary of my divorce.
Any ideas where this is to be found, or where I could ask a more targetted audience?
I watched this video several months ago, but don't consider yourself "extremely lucky" as a result, because I'm also unable to find it. It was white text on a black background, if I remember correctly. Comet Tuttle (talk) 22:52, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Why limit it to "no nukes?" Why would any future US Commander in Chief limit his options in that way? A President who insisted on fighting a war aimed at the total destruction of the U.S. without using the most effective weapons would likely be removed from power. In the 1980 BBC Oppenheimer (TV miniseries), General Groves was recruited to direct the project by the assurance that even if the Axis powers conquered the rest of the world, the U.S. could win with the A bomb. Accurate or not, that forecast did not even include ICBMs with MIRV warheads, intercontinental jet bombers and ballistic missile submarines. With conventional forces alone, and the rest of the world sufficiently riled up out of their traditional apathy and desire not to get involved in foreign military operations, invasion forces could assemble in Mexico and Canada and carve up the U.S. Getting any serious commitments of men, money, and materiel from the various countries of the world would not be an easy task, if one considers the token and grudging commitments for UN peacekeeping efforts, or armed actions in Afghanistan recently(only 9 countries contributed 1000 or more foreign troops). A passive defense in which the U.S. let a hostile world marshal forces along the Canadian and Mexican borders preliminary to an attack would be silly. An overwhelming force of troops and tanks could sweep into the U.S. if a large portion of the enumerated military resources shown in the articles cited by Gandalf61 were truly committed to the invasion. Good luck getting cooperation between Israel and the Moslem countries, or India and Pakistan. Good luck getting repressive governments to pony up the tanks and troops they use to keep their own people from rising up against them. Transporting these forces would likely require a lot of ships and a long time, and would need the harbors of Mexico and Canada. Rapid air transport of an invasion force adequate to overwhelm the U.S. military and civilian 2nd Amendment militia forces seems dubious. Ocean crossings by troopships, cargo ships and tankers could be detected by spy satellites or long distance recon flights if satellites were knocked out. Cruise missiles, airplanes and attack submarines could decimate an invasion fleet. War Plan Red, maintained by the U.S. War Department until 1939, called for the US to seize Canadian harbors to prevent the assembly of invasion forces. It went into detail as to which beaches to use for amphibious landings and which rail lines, highways and bridges to seize, along with how fast British forces could reinforce Canada's small forces during a "period of strained relations." Another of the United States Color-coded War Plans, War Plan Green dealt with preventing attack from Mexico. Mexico City would be seized within 30 daysof the invasion's start and a puppet government installed. U.S. forces would seize Veracruz, Tampico and oil fields. This war plan remained active until 1945. Parts of those two countries would have to be seized before forces for an invasion could assemble along the long and undefended borders of the U.S. The early 20th century war plans envisioned total mobilization of the U.S, with heavy losses, fighting against an invasion of the Puget Sound area by forces of Japan, Australia and New Zealand, with British and Canadian forces attacking from Halifax against the Northeast. Naval and air forces would provide the initial defense, while the general population was mobilized and equipped. [1]. The best defense might be an offense. If the world were crazy enough to try and conquer the U.S., then the U.S. might be crazy enough to conquer the Americas and add defensive naval bases in the Atlantic and Pacific from which to bomb Europe and Asia and interdict trade until they agreed to an armistice. Edison (talk) 17:08, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If either side used nukes in such a war we would face mutual assured destruction. I would classify that as a stalemate. Any country with nukes can pretty much guarantee that they will never lose a war, but nukes don't help you win wars (they only did in 1945 because only one country had them). --Tango (talk) 18:15, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Tactical nukes could be used against port facilities, railhubs, and troop concentrations minutes after hostile forces rolled across the US borders. It is unlikely such an invasion would start without achievement of air supremacy by the invaders, and air attacks on US airbases might call for destruction of the attacking bases, again with tactical nukes not ruled out by fear of MAD. Total mobilization and allout war , followed by guerrilla warfare against possible evil occupation troops (Red Dawn?) would result in the death of a huge portion of the population, not so different from widespread use of tactical nukes against military targets. President Kennedy made such an equation in 1960. Edison (talk) 20:28, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I would expect the use of tactical nukes by one side to quickly result in tactical nukes being used by the other. The size of those nukes would gradually (but quickly) creep up until you have full-sized nukes being fired by both sides and you would have MAD within days. I don't disagree that there is little difference in the direct results of a nuclear attack and a conventional one (compare Dresden and Hiroshima, for example), but the indirect results are very different due to psychology. --Tango (talk) 22:28, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Of course, you also have to consider what the objectives of both sides would be. It's fairly obvious (for the reasons Edison has given) that a straight-up invasion of the US would be incredibly difficult if not completely out of the question, but what if the alliance only wanted to cripple the US's economy or military strength? Obtaining their objective would be much easier than trying to invade and occupy the 4th largest country in the world. —Akrabbimtalk18:40, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That would be easy - you just ban all trade with the US and ban the purchase of US debt. The US economy would collapse pretty quickly. It would be very painful for the rest of the world, but if the rest of the world were united they could get through it. Standard of living in the US would plummet, although it would level out - without the massive trade deficit the US wouldn't need to borrow so much and they could probably reach a sustainable economy (at a much lower level) within a few decades. --Tango (talk) 18:58, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Forgive me, but there had been multiple complaints about the RD being too forum-y (and rant-y). I’m just a lowly RD newbie but is it wise to continue with this opinion/debate thread? Royor (talk) 18:59, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I am going to agree with Royor..."The reference desk does not answer requests for opinions or predictions about future events. Do not start a debate; please seek an internet forum instead." This is a classic "what if" question that ultimately has no definitive answer. Further discussion should be moved to the ref desk discussion page if necessary.10draftsdeep (talk) 19:19, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The Ref Desk is for more than "Simple Questions With Definite Answers." It is appropriate to ask questions which lack simple straightforward answers, and to cite references in response. Note that I referenced US war plans relevant to the US defense against at least the British Empire and Japan seeking to attack the northern U.S. border, and did not just speculate. Does it really matter what uniforms the troops seeking to invade the US wear? As for the general question of possible economic warfare, the UN often imposes sanctions against rogue states, and might do so if somehow the General Assembly voted that the US were such a rogue state. Such sanctions are weakened by countries neighboring the rogue which do not comply fully with the sanctions, and are not that effective against a large country with agriculture, natural resources, and a manufacturing capability. Canada and Mexico could conduits to aid the US in marketing its output and in purchasing raw materials, if some religion or political movement had taken over the rest of the world. The political front would be used to try and break up the improbable worldwide alliance of US Haters, playing off one faction against another. In a college political science course, the textbook (which I no longer have) said that the consequences of a WW2 victory by the Axis would have left the US facing a world where slave labor and access to natural resources would enable them to undercut the price of US produced goods, while restricting access to markets and to raw materials. It was judged that economic war for an extended period would be a more likely strategy of Japan and Germany than an immediate military invasion, even while neutral countries were converted to puppet states, like the "domino theories" of the Cold Warwhile research would continue on "superweapons." Edison (talk) 19:51, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Victory is convincing the other guy to stop fighting, or eliminating his ability to fight. On that basis, if every other country were against the USA, the overwhelming likelihood is that the US would stop fighting. DOR (HK) (talk) 04:23, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There was no "defeat" in the sense that Vietnamese troops now occupy the US and control all our activities. I am told they do operate excellent nail salons here, and the US has outsourced some manufacturing there. Retrieval of the remains of US air crews is also a profitable line for Vietnam. In the end the U.S. just adopted the initially ridiculed exit strategy of George Aiken: "Just announce we have won, and leave." In ending today's Afghanistan War, I would be happy to welcome Senator Aiken back. Edison (talk) 05:56, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I suspect the USA would quickly lose because of all the things it needs to import that it would no longer be able to import. Much as Britain almost lost WWI because of German U-boats sinking merchant shipping. --Dweller (talk) 12:41, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
As recentwars have shown, military might doesn't always lead to victory. If there was a USA vs Rest-of-the-world war, I imagine it would quickly degenerate into a lengthy and bloody insurgency against occupying forces. Astronaut (talk) 13:42, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Again, that depends on their aims. If they are truly united and want to physically occupy the land they probably could, but there would be armed resistance for decades, and what are the chances that China and Russia and Japan (all countries with historical mistrust of each other) would unite in such a manner, or that Mexico and Canada would allow an army buildup of that size on their territory without fearing that they themselves were going to get occupied? The question thus is quite academic and our speculation should be taken as little more then theoretical discourse without practical application. Googlemeister (talk) 21:00, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
True, but in such an event, one would theorize that all civilian usage of oil would simply be strictly rationed, greatly reducing oil used. Maybe a huge economic hit but not a show stopper. Googlemeister (talk) 22:26, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note that the old War Plan Green called for seizing the Mexican oil fields. Today there is also oil to be had in Venezuela. Any other nearby sources? Lots of oil goes for agricultural production, and numerous countries would have food shortages in a blocade/embargo, but the tractors would stop gulping fuel. They would not go on producing corn and beans with no external market. Of course crops could be made into biofuel for other needs. If pollution controls were relaxed, there is ample coal to replace oil used for power generation and heat. Edison (talk) 01:27, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Region of eastern China that doesn't have many people
Are you asking about western China? (Having lived for significant amounts of time on both coasts of the U.S., as well in London during my youth, I know how hard it is to keep east/west and coast/inland straight.) Western China, from my extremely limited and casual knowledge, is more mountainous and/or more arid than densely-populated Eastern China. Starting from the northeast, next to Korea, the four great regions surrounding the main part of China are Manchuria, Inner Mongolia, Sinkiang-Uighur lands-East Turkestan (Xinjiang-Uyghur Autonomous Region) and Tibet. [The four smaller gold stars surrounding the large star in the flag of the People's Republic of China can either represent different social classes allied with the working class, four smaller parties allied with the Chinese Communist Party, or those four large ethnic/geographical regions, which have a limited form of formal autonomy under the PRC's Constitution.] While Sinkiang and Tibet were historically sparsely-populated and isolated from central China, the Beijing government has recently been increasing communications, such as a long railway to Tibet, and encouraging much Han immigration fro Eastern China in efforts to increase economic development and political control. Wikipedia's not the place for either censorship or political advocacy, so I'm trying to write as neutrally as possible without distorting important facts, but it's no secret that both areas have seen both increased nationalism and sometimes-deadly ethnic conflicts. —— Shakescene (talk) 21:53, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think the OP was not referring to Manchuria or the out-lying areas, but the south-central portion which apparently does not have as much population density.
I'm not sure of the precise reasons for the relatively lack of large cities in that area, but this area roughly corresponds with the areas of the Nanling Mountains and the mountainous areas to the south of it ("Lingnan area", or "south of the mountains"). The hilly and mountainous terrain, and the fact that the area was absorbed into China rather late, may help to explain the phenomenon. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 22:20, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Fertilizer
I've heard that part of the problem finding bombs in Afghanistan (and Iraq) is that they're usually made with fertilizer that is widely available for use in agriculture. I have no feel for the chemistry behind this, so maybe it's a stupid question, but is it possible to turn all fertilizers into bombs? If not, couldn't the government ban the types that can be turned into bombs and/or subsidize the type that can't? Are alternatives to the bomb making fertilizers (if they exist) more expensive? TastyCakes (talk) 21:13, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Expanding on the above: most nitrogenous fertilizers are at least somewhat amenable to use in making Improvised explosive devices, due to the nature of their chemistry. Because of their near indispensibility for agriculture, it was impractical to ban such fertilisers in the comparatively highly controlled UK and Eire when they were used by terrorists on both sides of those states' mutual border during "The Troubles". Government "control" is far, far weaker in the huge, rugged and diverse country of Afghanistan, which also has extensive un-patrollable borders. If the Powers That Be (or Would Be) can't make many inroads into the huge illegal opium-poppy growing industry of the country, cracking down on a primarily innocent and essential commodity like fertilizer is going to be a non-starter. The only effective way to stop such (mis)use is going to be to remove the motivations for it. 87.81.230.195 (talk) 02:09, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
One option might be to "go organic" and use manure as fertilizer. It is flammable when dried, but not very explosive. I suppose if you could make it into a fine powder, blow it into the air at just the right concentration, then ignite it, you might get something like an air fuel bomb, but all that is likely well beyond the capability of the average Taliban terrorist. StuRat (talk) 04:28, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks guys, I read this article today which expands on all this. It says fertilizers that use Ammonium Nitrate are illegal and can be confiscated if found (but the person must be compensated if it may be for farming). Other fertilizers like urea based ones are allowed. TastyCakes (talk) 16:10, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Aaargh, after lots of Kuugeling in German references: Knizia and Strelow - afer a few detours - now seem to be part of Schindler Aufzüge (the German market leader in this area). We have an article on the Schindler Group, however, it does not mention K&S lifts. Schindler also has a sizeable presence in the US, having acquired the elevator/escalator division of Westinghouse in 1989. --80.123.57.243 (talk) 21:16, 12 November 2009 (UTC), Ooops, --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 21:19, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
November 12
aggressive invasion of personal space
Please answer as fast as possible.
I noted that some youngsters, especially immigrants from less civilised countries (like Pakistan), sometimes invade my personal space in an aggressive manner. This is how it happens: They come extremely close, and have their arms streched out to the sides. At the moment that this actually happens I feel extremenly uncomfortable. I normally step back. At the same time I have the desire to strike or call the cops.
I do understand that I feel uncomfortable because they invaded my space, and the tendency to step back is a normal unconscious response. However, these kids interpret my stepping back as a sign of weakness. What should I do? What would be the right response? Simply punching them???
What is happing in the mind of the "attacker"? This technique so common among the youth. What are they trying to achieve? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lowlife001 (talk • contribs) 01:33, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Your question unfortunately includes an unacceptable attack against Pakistanis as "less civilized," and therefore should be removed from the reference desk as trolling. Edison (talk) 05:47, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You obviously don't understand what trolling is; it's the intentional wording of things to make another person angry. In this case it appears the OP was unaware that their text caused such an effect. Now, I'm not saying it's ok or that the question (or section) shouldn't be removed, I'm simply correcting you on your wrongful labeling of the OP as a troll. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.43.89.85 (talk) 08:56, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, a fast and inadequate answer which others will doubtless improve upon. If you haven't already, read our article on Personal space, which includes the paragraph
"Personal space is highly variable. One factor in the general population density of a society with those living in a densely populated places tending to have a smaller personal space. Residents of India tend to have a smaller personal space than those in the Mongolian steppe, both in regard to home and individual. For a more detailed example, see Body contact and personal space in the United States.
So two factors are likely operating here. One is that those individuals themselves have a smaller perception of personal space than you and are invading yours unconsciously: this may be seen operating at a less overt level at multinational/multicultural parties, where one of a conversing pair with a larger PS is unconsciously backed around the room or into a corner by one with a smaller PS. The other is that crowding someone's personal space is a widely-known technique for intimidating or dominating that person, and since your description implies some potential aggression in the situation ("these kids interpret my stepping back as a sign of weakness"), they're likely doing it deliberately to intimidate or provoke you. How you behave in the light of that is down to you - personally I would try to avoid getting into such situations in the first place, but neither I nor anyone else on these desks can fully appreciate your personal circumstances and provide explicit advice. 87.81.230.195 (talk) 01:56, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I've had to deal with "violations of my personal space" in three main places: at work, at the grocery store, and on airplanes. In all cases, I think it's just because others have a smaller personal space, not that they are trying to intimidate me. My first solution is to put an object between us. At work I might use a chair, at the grocery store I might use my grocery cart, and when boarding and leaving a plane I might use luggage. However, there are times when I don't have an object handy. I then resort to the "side stance". I stand with my legs spread out, with one foot right up against the person or people trying to crowd me. I look something like this at the time:
O
/|\
|
/ \
_/ \_
While this has prevented me from having the pleasure of smelling and feeling people from around the world, it has also kept me from grabbing a machine gun and mowing them all down. StuRat (talk) 03:30, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It also helps to avoid crowds. If the elevator is full, I take the stairs. When leaving an airplane, I let the crowd pass, first, and leave last. If a store or restaurant has long lines, I go elsewhere. And when going to renew my drivers license at the DMV, I'm careful to call in a bomb threat first to thin out the crowd. :-) StuRat (talk) 03:35, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Also, I would like to point out that the Pakistani people (or any group of people for that matter) are not less civilized. Your customs and my customs are just as strange and potentially impolite to them as theirs are to you and me. If there are certain individuals who are trying to intimidate you, it is because they are jerks, not because of their nationality. If they are not trying to intimidate you, it is merely cultural differences, and if it really bothers you, I would recommend discussing politely that you don't like it when people are too close. If they are really trying to intimidate you, then avoid them or go through the proper channels to stop it. Under no circumstances would I recommend punching anybody unless it is necessary for defense of yourself or others. Falconusptc04:25, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well, trying to intimidate people is more common is some societies than others. For example, this could be considered a part of the machismo which is expected of men in certain cultures. StuRat (talk) 04:34, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
One more point to make. Obviously it's possible that some people will do things like this to intimidate others. But it's also possible that if A (with a small personal space) tries to get into what A sees as a normal position near B (whose personal space is larger), B will withdraw to the distance comfortable for B, but A will see this withdrawal as rude in the same way that B sees A's stance as aggressive. A is thinking "what's wrong with this person, how awful does he think people like me are, that he has to stand way over there?"
Thus both people can make each other uncomfortable without either one understanding why. I'm not saying that this does or doesn't relate to the original poster's situation, just that it happens. --Anonymous, 04:42 UTC, November 12, 2009.
In a case where the two cultures clash, I'd go for the "less intimate" solution, as there's far more potential to upset someone if you are too close than if you are too distant. For another example, shaking hands is common in the US and Europe, but if I met someone from another country where this is taboo, I'd be willing to skip this, and do a little bow or something instead. StuRat (talk) 13:58, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Spoken like someone from a country where people's personal space is larger. --Anonymous, 19:47 UTC, November 13, 2009.
I did include the handshaking example, where the other culture is the "more distant" one, specifically to show that it's not a matter of "my way is the right way", but rather a case of freaking people out more by being too close to them than by being too far away. Even in cultures where people are very close, being too close would still be rather upsetting. StuRat (talk) 04:50, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
OP, if your definition of ‘more civilized’ is ‘more consideration of personal space,’ then Mongolia heads the list, and Macao brings up the tail. And, if someone standing nearby with their arms out makes you feel the need to strike out, you seriously need to learn some basic civility yourself. (Just for clarification: you yourself would be the ‘attacker.’) DOR (HK) (talk) 05:34, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If they are bumping into you a lot, they may be trying to pick your pockets, so take precautions (e.g. jam your hands into your pockets if you can't zip them up). 69.228.171.150 (talk) 07:58, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It is possible that this is behavoir (particularly the spreading of the arms) is a form of intimidation and is not limited to "immigrants from less civilised countries". If they are obstructing you when you are just out walking, or if it makes you feel threatened, you might be better off seeking the help of the police.
One the other hand, if you are feeling brave and want to challenge such behavoir yourself, why not step even closer instead of backing away. Of course, you will need to be ready in case the intimidation turns into violence. Astronaut (talk) 12:40, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Have you tried actually saying you'd prefer them to remain at arms length or whatever? Many poeople can go for ages wondering why people treat them wrong without ever being told it's for something like this. Dmcq (talk) 12:46, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
... and where the garlic eater doesn't do that. Recent garlic breath has never been offensive to me, but what's offensive is where a person eats garlic and then sweats and doesn't bathe. -- JackofOz (talk) 20:17, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
On a side note, it is not unheard for North Europeans and South Europeans talking to each other to do a sort of tango around a room whilst trying to hold a conversation; it's entirely subconscious and I doubt whether anyone interprets it as a sign of weakness. Certainly, in these circumstances, it is merely a cultural difference. I don't have any experience of your situation however. - Jarry1250[Humorous? Discuss.]20:48, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
ok well first of all Pakistanies dont know the meaning of personal space. they actualy take it as disrispectful if you back away, and if your in there country, allways shake with your right hand. they uh.... dont have tolet paper so the left hand is there... yeah. --Talk Shugoːː 18:56, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm having trouble finding an answer too.This article has a lot of talk about the insurance, and WPs FDIC page makes clear that safety boxes aren't covered by FDIC insurance (although banks may have outside insurance). You might be able to extrapolate from bank robberies. If you assume that not every bank robbery results in the theft of the box, then that provides an upward bound on the number. The FBI has a whole section dedicated to the issue. Other governments may have similar statistics. Shadowjams (talk) 06:35, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
After reading a few travelogues, it sounds as though the road is at least minimally paved for the entire route. However, traveling south from San Jose, you will need to deal with twisty, roughly paved, and treacherous mountain roads. Once you cross the border into Panama, the quality of the road improves, but you may run into construction, as the road is being expanded to two lanes in each direction in Panama. Marco polo (talk) 02:26, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
find a fiction book
i read a book several years back about an american police detective who's son dies of an overdose, he finds and kills the dealer and goes on the hunt for the suppliers, the reader feels for the detective and sympathises with his hunt...ring any bells ? any sugestions. thanks, bob≠ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mazeroony (talk • contribs) 15:47, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Old film OK to process?
I found a disposable film camera in my garage that is about 15 years old. About half of the available exposures have been used. I think the photos I took when the camera was new are ones I would like to have. Will the prints turn out OK if I have the film developed after so many years? What if I take photos today with the rest of the unexposed film? Am I wasting my money by having the film developed? The camera has been in a cool, dark place. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.60.31.103 (talk) 20:37, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It may work.
Be sure to tell the photo processors about the whole situation, and, if possible, try to go to a place where the people actually know about photography, like a camera store. (ie: Not the drug store.) If you can find a place that caters to professionals that'd be best. They may be able to tinker with the chemistry to increase the likelihood of success. APL (talk) 20:45, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There is likely to be a color shift, but with color negative film, that can be corrected automatically in the printing and further in Photoshop. There is likely to be some fogging of the film which would reduce contrast. Unless it was stored in a very hot place, you are likely to get ok photos from it. I would not bother taking more exposures on the disposable camera, because you would pay for expensive processing of impaired film. I have developed film (black and white) which was over 40 years old and it had some recognizable images. Go for it. I would just take it to the regular 1 hour processing place. Edison (talk) 00:51, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If they don't, for some reason, have the equipment to process it, they will usually just mail it off to a facility that does. It takes a little extra time but I don't think it is otherwise much more expensive. I haven't dealt with real film for awhile, though, so maybe things have changed since I last did. --Mr.98 (talk) 03:24, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think it would be 35mm film inside the disposable, but I am unaware of a film format change in the last 15 years. The images may be lower contrast and with muddy color, but if it is the last picture of Grandma or new pix of the offspring when they were toddlers, it would be nice to have them. Edison (talk) 15:04, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The film is almost certainly C-41 process, which is the current color negative process, and has been since the early 1970s. You should be able to find a "C-41" marking on the camera. As long as it is C-41, any lab should be able to process it. A professional lab, like A&I, may do a better job printing the images, by manually correcting for color balance and exposure shifts that may have occurred. Drug store labs usually just let the machine run on automatic. Rocky Mountain Film specializes in processing old film, but may be overkill for your situation—they'll handle obsolete processes (like C-22) and formats (like Disc film). -- Coneslayer (talk) 15:17, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And the usual warning goes with film: before you develop it be sure you don't have any pics of kids in the tub, or you might be arrested, have your kids taken away, and be branded a sex offender for life. StuRat (talk) 18:43, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Architect that preferred to live with his clients prior to design their residences
I heard of a Contemporary Architect that liked to live with his clients, in their present homes, before designing clients' new resedences. This was supposedly to learn more about his clients' tastes, habits, likes and dislikes, etc...
If all goes well, American astronaut Randolph Bresnik will become a father while in space. His wife, who is nine months pregnant, is due six days after the launch of STS-129. Would he be the first person to become a parent while in space, or has it occurred before? 94.212.31.237 (talk) 00:38, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Many groceries may have it next to the vanilla in the baking section. Otherwise you will need a store that sells ckae and candy making supplies. Make sure you know whether you need the more dilute "flavor" (2 fl. oz. bottles) or the much more concentrated extracts (1 dram bottles) 75.41.110.200 (talk) 02:48, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If a CGAUX award/ribbon/medal is not a * Federal * award, Then what would it be called. Since they belong to homeland security ? And the CG over looks what they do —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.191.151.185 (talk) 01:38, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
since this has happened do stores still display 99 cent items? it is common for resellers to make items 99 cents or 99 dollars as a marketing scheme to make the item appear much cheaper. since this coin reform, would a retailer set a once 7.99$ item to 7.90$ or to a flat 8.00$? have prices overall been rounded off to the nearest dollar, or do they still use strange prices to deceive customers? or did new zealand always have round prices like in japan (1000 yen instead of 999 yen).
Pennies were removes in 1967 along with pounds and all that. Then we moved to dollars, including 1c, 2c and 5c coins. 1 and 2 cent coins were removed in 1990. After this, prices were still routinely $1.99. $1.95 is/was also a common price. In 2006 the 5c coins were removed, and prices still remain $x.99 and $x.95. $x.90 is uncommon. Aaadddaaammm (talk) 05:22, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I live for the day that is done in the U.S., instead of having nuisance cents, of negligible worth. This is not 1900. Just round up/down by computerized cash register. Edison (talk) 05:27, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In Australia and New Zealand, prices are rounded if you pay in cash (ie, if you buy $4.98 worth of goods you hand over $5 and don't get any change), but not if you pay by electronic means. Rounding is applied on the total when you pay, not on each item. As for Japan's "round prices", Japan, like the US, does not show tax on sticker prices, so when you go and buy your ¥100 items from Daiso, you actually have to pay ¥105. BTW, in case you're not aware, "nickel" and "penny" are not universal terms; in Australia and NZ we say "5 cent coin" and "1 cent coin" (and "10 cent coin" rather than "dime"). FiggyBee (talk) 05:35, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Actually we're just as likely to say "one cent piece" etc. Certainly never "nickel" or "penny" (or dime, quarter, sawbuck, or any of those other quaint terms), though we do talk of bucks. FWIW, some people talk of a $1 coin as a Razoo, a $5 note as an Edmund, and a $50 note as a Chief, but those terms have never really caught on, and in international trade the NZ dollar is often known as the Kiwi. As to the rounding, there's little I can add to what's already been said - if you're using electronic funding (EFTPOS, etc) or cheques, amounts are exact. If you're using cash, the last digit is rounded. Personally, I'd like to see all major world currencies revalue by a factor of 10 - the final digit in the cents column is next to useless for most currencies. FWIW, there was a time when New Zealand went one further than this - there were ½ cent, 2½ cent and 7½ cent definitive postage stamps back in the early 1970s, despite us never having had a half cent coin (they were sold in pairs, I think). Grutness...wha?06:23, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In the US there are some businesses that round to the nearest nickel in the customer's favor. (To round the other way would bring complaints.) StuRat (talk) 13:32, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
So in a country with no 1 cent coins, anything you buy costs at least .05. Then presumably .07 rounds down to .05 and .08 rounds up to .10? If I want 2 screws at a hardware store at .07 each, I could buy them one at a time and spend .10 total, or I could by 2 of them at once and spend the same .15 (neglecting any effects of a sales tax). Edison (talk) 15:01, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Home improvement store ("big box" store like Home Depot or Lowes), no. Hardware stores (local stores like Ace Hardware, True Value and Do It Best), yes. The decent ones, at least, have a section in the back where there's various screw, bolts, nuts, etc. They're mainly there for repair jobs - like when you've lost a screw or washer on an item and need 1-2 new ones (but not a whole box) for a replacement. -- 128.104.49.120 (talk) 16:28, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
When we eliminated 1 and 2 cent coins in Australia a few stores loudly announced that they would always round down, but I'm not aware of anywhere which still has that policy. I guess if you really wanted to, you could save money by making sure you always got rounded down when you went through the checkout, but is it worth the hassle to save 5c? FiggyBee (talk) 16:50, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You might be surprised what people will do. I know someone who, when he puts petrol in his tank, always ensures the price is, say, $40.02. That way, he gets 2 cents worth of petrol for free. He reckons it adds up over time, which it does, but still .... -- JackofOz (talk) 19:36, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I live in North America, but I visited Australia and New Zealand in the 1980s when they both had 1 and 2 cent coins in circulation. I observed that prices in NZ tended to end in a random digit -- you might see things costing $1.46 or $1.52 -- but in Australia they tended to be in round numbers, so it would be $1.50 and you didn't use the small coins very much. Both practices were different from the $1.49-plus-tax
that I would expect at home. Of course, in both countries, like everywhere I've been in Europe but
unlike most of North America, any tax was included in the price rather than added later. --Anonymous, 19:54 UTC, Friday the 13th of November, 2009.
thanks for the answers, i was not aware that 99¢ prices are kept for electronic payment. i guess electronic payment will prevent the disappearance of the 99¢ pricing scheme. kind of a shame because i was hoping that removal of small coins would just get all prices rounded properly. i would really like to see a pricing system that includes taxes by law and simply had items priced at 230$ rather than 199.95$ for example. also like the term 'five cent piece', 'ten cent piece'. naming each coin is kind of old school now that i think of it :/ Bonusbox (talk) 20:10, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Bonus, one of us -- could be me -- is still misunderstanding part of this discussion. As I understand it, 99¢ prices at the individual item level are NOT going to go away, EVER, and electronic payment has nothing to do with it. Every place I've ever encountered this situation, the rounding to next-higher-unit is done ONCE at the end of the transaction, not on each individual item. Eliminating pennies does NOTHING to change the price of individual items. (Right?)
With regard to your tax comment, I don't think anyone has considered the following: Yes, you could have individual prices carry the total price inclusive of all taxes IN THE STORE -- but that's only one place that prices are displayed. As soon as you go to national advertising, regional advertising like the color inserts in the Sunday papers, or ANY out-of-store advertising that covers more than one store, HOW are you cover the case where the tax rates are different in two areas?
This is a very common situation in the US. Each state has its own sales tax rate (including zero for some); different states tax different items at different rates (where I live, food-not-sold-in-a-restaurant, clothing, and all services are not taxed); individual counties can levy surcharges on the sales tax to fund baseball stadiums; even cities can impose their own local tax on certain purchases. Posting pricing to include all applicable taxes is not at all the trivial problem that most people seem to think it is.
Where does the tax get paid for mail orders? It doesn't seem practical for the company to pay the taxes to each city a customer orders from. Surely the tax is determined by the company's location, so there is no problem with advertising it. --Tango (talk) 01:24, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What they're supposed to do, and what they actually do, are frequently two different things :-). More and more such companies, in my experience (OR alert) collect only the base rate for the buyer's state. My other recollection is that an attempt to charge based on the company's state, didn't last very long, for obvious reasons. -- DaHorsesMouth (talk) 03:10, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In countries which stopped issuing 1 cent coins, and where prices are rounded down or up: what happened if a customer presented old cents thereafter? Did the merchant say "That is no longer money" or "I have no drawer in my cash register for cents" or did they simply accept the cents? Edison (talk) 03:55, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
According to the Royal Australian Mint [3], 1 and 2 cent coins are still legal tender for transactions up to 20c, and indeed pre-decimal coins are still legal tender at a rate of one shilling = 10c. New Zealand, on the other hand, has gone down completely the opposite route; the pre-2006 coins have been demonetised and are no longer legal tender. FiggyBee (talk) 08:30, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Of course, being legal tender has nothing to do with whether or not they are accepted in shops. Legal tender has to do with the payment of debts; when you buy something in a shop the exchange of money and goods happens simultaneously so there is no debt. A shop can decide for itself what to accept or not accept in payment (subject to local discrimination laws, etc.). --Tango (talk) 08:39, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
When the 1 and 2c coins were phased out, shopkeepers stopped giving them in change and there was no reason for customers to carry them, so they disappeared from circulation fairly quickly. They were certainly still accepted for a while after the change, and they're still readily bankable as far as I know, so whether they would be accepted now... who knows? Most shopkeepers have probably not seen them for several years, so they may accept them just for the novelty. FiggyBee (talk) 12:32, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Our smallest coin in South Africa is the 5c and our prices are advertised VAT inclusive. Goods are still advertised as Rx.99 but all the stores with computerised cash registers round DOWN the final price to the nearest 5c, regardless of whether you're paying cash or credit card, however it might not be rounded down if you are buying on your store account (i.e. with a "store credit card"). You could score 4c at a time by buying all your R x.99 items individually, but really, why bother? Zunaid·FOREVER13:43, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
People have already mentioned electronic transactions but perhaps an additional important thing to mention is that both NZ and Australia (thanks to EFTPOS and also credit cards to some extent) a very high percentage of transactions are electronic. I'm lazy to search but I believe the rate is something like 80%. In terms of the elimination of .x9 and .x5 prices as others have said this isn't going to happen even without electronic transactions. Beyond what has already been said, the key issue is that these are use because of the perceived psychological advantage which doesn't disappear. Also in terms of anonymous's observation, this isn't the case in NZ nowadays from my experience. Most prices are either .x9, .x5 or .x0 with .x9 being the most common (.99 being the most common for those especially for higher value items obviously). I don't know what it's like in the US but this doesn't tend happen at the higher price range either. For example you may have a price of $99.99 but you're far less likely to have $999.99 (instead $999). The funny thing was that during the elimination of the 5 cent coin, there was some complaints about prices likely to be going up because of it (I believe there were similar complaints with the 1 and 2 cent coin and it's a common argument in other countries when similar moves are proposed) which was obviously patent nonsense, most retailers were still keeping the .x9 prices which the occasional .x5 without the 1 and 2 cent coin, this was clearly not going to change (if it did, it would likely often be downwards, e.g. if an item was 1.99 they would have made it 1.90 rather then 2.00) Nil Einne (talk) 09:20, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. I don't know why, but for the past hour I've been delaying my sleep to find this coat of arms. I can remember some things about it, but they're mostly visual. I don't think it's a coat of arms of a modern country, but it may be of a country that is no longer existent. Or I may be wrong and it's from some small little town in the middle of nowhere! The coat of arms is definitely from Europe, and I want to find it because it's big. It's been divided many times, which is why it's so interesting to me (no I'm not talking about the coat of arms of the Temple-Nugent-Brydges-Chandos-Grenville family; it's not as large as that). I also believe that it's from somewhere small, which was ironic owing to its size. This coat of arms has a lot of extra flare, I guess you could say; hanging chains with religious symbols. I am also sure that it has the Medici coat of arms somewhere in it. The quality of the image of the coat of arms isn't that great, too. Lastly, I found a web page specifically about this coat of arms that explained all the different parts of it. It's definitely somewhere on Wikipedia, I just don't know where. If you could think of anything to help me find it, I've been searching here, Wikimedia, and google for it for too long. Any indulgence of my curiosity-turned-OCD would be wonderful! Helixer (talk) 05:11, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Many coats of arms carry many quarterings and the kinds of symbol you described, so you haven't really narrowed it down too far. See (for example) Seize Quartiers. What I would suggest (unless you obsessively scrub your tracks) is pulling up the "history" for the browser you were using when you ran across that web site. With a little tweaking you might be able to find the Wikipedia/Wikimedia page you were viewing, or at least find the path you took. And since you remember it as being on Wikipedia, as well as the rough dates of your search, you should be able to exclude many irrelevant pages from other sites. Also look through the many links and categories at Portal:Heraldry and Vexillology. If you were just going by the vague details you gave above, I might not offer much hope, but the path you took through Wikipedia and the web makes things a lot easier. Good luck. —— Shakescene (talk) 07:16, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Try this link at WikiCommons: Category:Ecclesiastical_heraldry, which has over 600 images. Some have many quarterings and some have the many tassels of a cardinal's hat in the crest, but I didn't see one that had both. But you should also press the plus sign [+] to the left of "Ecclesiastical heraldry" in the little box above "Subcategories" to see other pages. —— Shakescene (talk) 09:25, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oh thank you so much! It's the Coat of Arms of the Kingdom of Two Sicilies! It wasn't as big as I remembered, I guess... sorry. Thanks for all your help! Helixer (talk) 01:48, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No calls for JOB ?
what is the next best thing to do in order to fetch a job or even recieve a call fom any consultant after having made an impressive resume and posting them to all the major job portals in india? is there anything am missing?any good advices please —Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.117.129.17 (talk) 10:25, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'd say the personal touch is missing. Send notes to the companies you are interested in, explaining how you admire their company and would like to work for them. StuRat (talk) 13:09, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It is sad and rather dis-heartening that many recruitment consultants don't have the good manners to call (or email) you back if your application is unsuccessful. Astronaut (talk) 00:20, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What makes you think your resume is impressive? As a reality check, ask the opinions of several people who are not specially friendly or related to you. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 12:33, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In my experience 'posting to the job portals' is a very ineffective way of finding a job. Almost all companies get hundreds of applications for every job they advertise - searching job portals for likely candidates is simply not worth their while. Recruitment consultants likewise.
The best way to find a job is to use any personal contacts you have at companies in your line of work. That can be tough if you are young or new to the field and don't have the contacts, but do it if you have any. After that, go and find companies you might like to work for, or who are advertising jobs you might apply for, and send them a resume directly. DJ Clayworth (talk) 20:30, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Applicants from India (and other places) are often encouraged to send the same resume and cover letter to absolutely anyone who might possibly be interested in them. In Western eyes this can sometimes be considered a sign of desperation and not something that recommends the applicant to a job. It is considered better to have a specifically tailored resume and cover letter for each employer you contact. The specific tailoring addresses the company's own specialities and how the applicant fits the position, with reference to specifics. For example, something like "I will be a benefit to Company because I have Skill, which is a skill Company values according to WebsiteReference." It implies that an applicant has taken time to research the company and has chosen it above others.
It is still not a good thing that companies are not acknowledging their applicants' applications - an e-mail or letter is appropriate here, rather than a phone call, which would be to arrange an interview. When there are hundreds, or perhaps thousands of applicants, this is inconvenient, but is easy to do with form letters. Steewi (talk) 02:59, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Even if your aim is to get your resume to anyone who might be interested, I believe it is going to be a lot more effective to send it to many people than post it on a website and wait for people to look for it. With hundreds of resumes in their inbox, nobody is going to actively go out and look for more. DJ Clayworth (talk) 22:25, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I had to call a certain company about my subscription to their service and was routed to their call centre in South Africa. During the call the handler and I discussed the World Cup next year (which is being held in S.A.). And then out of the blue he told me he supported Liverpool in the UK - so far OK with me. But a few days later I had to re-call the company and again was routed to their call centre in South Africa whereupon the different call handler told me he was an avid supporter of..........Liverpool. Why am I paranoid perhaps? Well, I never told either of them where I was from or which football team I might support, but as it happens, I am from North Yorkshire in England and have a fairly "thick" accent that is made very adenoidal by my early-life adenoids being removed, which often results in me being wrongly identified as a Liverpudlian (coming from Liverpool). Question, can I be forgiven for thinking that the call-handlers in question were somehow analysing my accent, perhaps mechanically, during the call to strike up a warm chummy loyalty-inspiring side-conversation that mistakenly identified my accent as coming from Liverpool? Or am I becoming paranoid? 92.20.97.190 (talk) 12:51, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Salesmen do actually do things like that, so it's certainly quite possible. It's amazing what you can tell from a voice: "I was just talking with an obese, middle-aged black woman smoker who recently immigrated from Jamaica, and she must have accidentally transferred me to you, can you please transfer me back ?". StuRat (talk) 13:05, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If the averred Liverpool allegiances were not genuine - which they may well have been - I think it's more likely that it has nothing to do with your accent, and the call centre has merely identified "Liverpool" as being a broadly acceptable team, neither obscure nor inflammatory. I'd be very surprised if you'd been tagged by a mk1 auto-scouse-detector. FiggyBee (talk) 17:04, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not an expert on Commonwealth relationships, but I don't think that (average, probably uneducated) South Africans can tell apart regional dialects from England. Rimush (talk) 17:45, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What the FUCK??? I'm sorry, would you care to retract that highly condescending remark you piece of (insert nationality here) scum ? Can you tell apart a Cape Town accent from a Durban, Port Elizabeth or Joburg accent? How "uneducated" do you presume South Africans to be? Zunaid·FOREVER13:22, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Calm down. This was probably an honest mistake, and I'm sure that the average citizen of most nations could be referred to as uneducated. No need to start shouting at him right away. —Akrabbimtalk13:44, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I'll use <sarcasm> tags next time. To be clear, I was using extreme hyperbole to illustrate the ridiculousness of the poster's assumptions. BTW, why on earth would he (and you) assume that the "average, uneducated person" would land a job in the call centre industry? Zunaid·FOREVER14:13, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
At least in the states where I am, a call center worker is not usually a high-paying job requiring any kind of higher education, so I guess it is kind of Americo-centric (or UK-centric as well, maybe, I don't know where Rimush is posting from) to assume that the job has the same standing in other countries. I guess why there are so many of that type of job outsourced to places like India. —Akrabbimtalk22:36, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
While it's true a call centre probably isn't a high paying job, it doesn't follow that they won't be able to tell accents apart. For starters, I'm pretty sure it's quite common they are at a minimum taught to understand difference accents. This training may go as far as to teach them where they come from. Just because someone doesn't know something doesn't mean they can't learn Nil Einne (talk) 08:49, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Zunaid-FOREVER apologised and should have left it at that. I have struck out "you piece of (insert nationality here) scum" because it is personal abuse that is already preceded by "I'm sorry", it is a gratuitous insult that is not part of the question, and it can not be excused as hyperbole. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 17:41, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Many service industries and call centers have scripts that employees are supposed to follow and it wouldn't surprise me at all if this call center gave your location based on the number you called from and gave the operator a list of appropriate topics and answers to talk about. Most call center software also lets employees take notes on customers. Yours may say "Supports Liverpool in World Cup" 206.131.39.6 (talk) 18:46, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think they've identified "Liverpool" as a football team which is acceptable to support, as opposed to Manchester United which is a football team which completely polarises opinion in England. --TammyMoet (talk) 20:44, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It could well be that they break it down regionally. They tell people from the north of England that they like Liverpool, people from the south of England that they like Arsenal or something, and people from Scotland, Wales, or Northern Ireland that they like a team from that person's country. Marco polo (talk) 21:09, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In know in some Indian call centres they can watch the latest Eastenders episodes or suchlike so they can empathise better with customers. Dmcq (talk) 12:37, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What you need to realise is that South Africa has a HUGE, ENORMOUS, MASSIVE (can I possibly emphasise this enough?) English Premiership following, with widespread coverage both on Super Sport and in our newspapers. Heck, the Cape Argus even has a pull-out supplement every week dedicated exclusively to European (mainly English) football. The two clubs with the most vocal, polarised and opinionated supporter bases are Man United and Liverpool, as clearly evidenced by the way the Argus's SMS column gets flooded with pro- this club and anti- that club SMSes after every weekend's round of games. (The Liverpool beachball goal fiasco set off a particularly amusing barrage of SMSes between the supporters and haters.) I'm not at all surprised that a conversation about the World Cup next year with an Englishman would have prompted both salesmen to reveal their club allegiance. Your chances of having gotten 2 Liverpool (or Man United, Chelsea or Arsenal) supporters on the line would be extremely high. I doubt it has anything to do with your ACTUAL location or favourite club. Zunaid·FOREVER13:14, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I would not be surprised if many call centres have a note on a customer's entry where information on previous entries have been written, so that patter can be added while information is being looked up. Nothing particularly personal, but a favourite football team, or hobby that's mentioned and brought back gives the feeling of being special (and stalked...). It's also true, by rumour at least, that call centre employees are required to be up to date on things like local football, popular TV shows, weather and news. Some people call this sort of localisation a form of deception, because it can give the impression that the call centre is in the same country. It's very impressive from a marketing perspective. Steewi (talk) 03:08, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Moka coffee sort of brown instead of sort of black
So I have a big Moka coffeemaker and sometimes when I pour its coffee in a glass it has like a diluted brownish color. When it has that color it tastes somewhat bad. Why's that? --Belchman (talk) 13:15, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'd guess that it's the water you put into it. This could especially be a problem if the coffee is made first thing in the morning when the water has been sitting in the pipes all night. Look at it in a glass and see if it's clear or cloudy white. If white, it might have lots of calcium or some other mineral in it, which ruins the taste of your coffee. You can try running the water a bit before you fill the coffee maker. If that doesn't work, you need to use a water filter, either the faucet type or the pitcher type. StuRat (talk) 14:05, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"calcium or some other mineral", Stu? Cloudy tap water is usually just air bubbles; let it sit for a few minutes and see if it clears. FiggyBee (talk) 16:55, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but if it was air bubbles they wouldn't affect the taste and also would bubble out during the coffee prep, so wouldn't affect the color, either. StuRat (talk) 18:39, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There's a reason they call coffee with no milk or sugar "black". (It's either black or maybe very dark brown, but never light brown.) StuRat (talk) 04:55, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Right. It's not so much that Africa didn't have empires, as those empires didn't leave a written history that survived. --M@rēino20:59, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Is their some way you can convince yourself you are physically attracted to someone when your not?? Like hypnosis? It is necessary so please none of the "Why would you want to do that? That's stupid." answers or the like. Thanks in advance for any help. 86.138.158.223 (talk) 23:08, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This sounds like a Savage Love question, and I will therefore channel Dan Savage: It's not possible, and the relationship is therefore totally doomed. Do not try this. You need to take a step back and question why it is "necessary", and find some other way out of your problem, whatever it is. Comet Tuttle (talk) 00:11, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It is certainly possible to make yourself believe a lie to be true (even to the point you forget it was a lie), often presented as the only true way of getting round lie detectors. But as for this particular "untruth"... I doubt it. - Jarry1250[Humorous? Discuss.]13:10, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry to state the obvious, but people in loving relationships often find that they grow increasingly physically attracted to each other. This takes a long time, though. Staecker (talk) 14:09, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the help. I was finding I seemed not attracted to someone who I have been intensely physically attracted to for some while. This bugged me until a few moments ago when I decided to look at a picture of someone else I am attracted to and found I wasn't attracted to them. So its not really bad at all, it's just a temporary period of asexuality which should go back to noraml (soon hopefully). It's not actually a loving relationship, as such, more obsessive love. Thanks very much. :D 86.138.158.223 (talk) 14:31, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
So, I got a parking ticket slapped on the windscreen of my car just a couple of hours before I left Hungary during a recent holiday. Now 8 weeks later, a letter drops on my doormat demanding a vastly inflated (4x) payment. Should I bother pointing out the lack of obvious signs or ticket machines in the car park that would have indicated the need to pay?
Don't slap this guy with accusation of seeking legal advice which we cannot do...I think we can legitimately answer this question on what authorities are likely to be sympathetic to...Of course we may want him to waive his rights to sue or subject him to a binding arbitration clause--152.3.240.22 (talk) 00:44, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It depends on how things normally work in Hungary. If there is a system where you need a parking permit to part anywhere displaying a particular logo, or similar, (which is highly possible) then it would have been very easy for you not to know that rule, however that wouldn't be a defence (ignorance of the law almost never is). --Tango (talk) 01:29, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
All I saw was the white "P" on a square blue background which is pretty much standard throughout Europe, including Hungary, to indicate a car parking area. There was just no indication of a need to pay. Elsewhere in Hungary, I saw prominent signs on the same pole as the "P" with parking tariffs and hours of operation and machines to issue tickets nearby. I was therefore quite surprised to find a ticket on my car. Astronaut (talk) 01:45, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sadly there's not one law for residents and another for visitors. Residents would probably have known it was a no-parking zone just through familiarity. In my home town of Vienna the parking signs are pretty obscure sometimes and (of course) all spelled out in German. If you don't read the language you've got no hope. In other words, I think you're just going to have to suck it up and pay the fine. --Richardrjtalk email06:08, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Richard and Ron have missed the point. I'm not suggesting I should be immune from the law in Hungary just because I'm a foreign visitor. I think that the signage should have been present, like I saw elsewhere in Hungary. The blue sign with the "P" was obvious, but it did not have the accompanying sign detailing tariffs and hours as seen elsewhere. In my own country, parking that you must pay for is clearly marked, because a lack of signs is often a reasonable case for the fine being waived. I am wondering if the same is true in Hungary. Astronaut (talk) 16:21, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Why don´t you contact the Hungarian embassy in London and explain the matter? They have what I assume to be a helpful website. I have to assume, because it is all in Hungarian. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 19:06, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
So let me understand. You were visiting Hungary and shortly before you left the country, you got a parking ticket. Several weeks later you got a notice in the mail requesting you to pay the ticket (presumably at your house in another country?). What is to stop you from telling the people who sent you the ticket to shove it where the sun don't shine? I do not think that they have any legal hold over you outside their country anymore. Of course, I am in the US and don't know how that EU thing works, so I might be wrong on that. Googlemeister (talk) 16:14, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Spooks or, as it's known in the US, MI-5
In the television series Spooks, when they segue from one scene to another, they often put the location of the new scene at the bottom of the screen. It's usually something like "London, E10". (I'm going from memory, so my apologies if the number is wrong) What is the "E10" part?
And secondly, when the characters go into their office area, they have to go through some sort of revolving door type thing. What does that do? Is it some sort of electronics scanner or bomb detector? Dismas|(talk)03:14, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Abbey Road is in NW8E10 is a London postal district - as well as being postcodes, these districts are used for general orientation in London. The revolving door type thing (which I seem to remember is called a "pod") is a magic everything scanner, I remember one recent storyline where Ros (or was it the other one?) was given some sort of super-duper listening device which could get through it. FiggyBee (talk) 03:31, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! I've only just started watching the series, so I haven't gotten to any episodes that might explain the pods. In case anyone is wondering, I love it so far. The DVDs are interesting too since the main menu isn't printed on the screen but actually spoken. Dismas|(talk)04:05, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The BBC seem to have moved to spoken navigation on DVDs, for accessibility. That is, you get a spoken and written instruction at the beginning, giving you the option of audio navigation if you want it. I'm a little surprised that this would be the default without the clear option of a visual menu, since that limits access for the deaf or hard of hearing. 86.149.189.52 (talk) 13:22, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The revolving door is probably a turnstyle that limits access to one person at a time. Presumably each person presents some form of ID card to get through, and the turnstyle stops a second person from entering on the first person's card, ie preventing the common scenario with a normal door that one person swipes a card and a group of people enter (in which case the access control system doesn't that the other people are in the building). Mitch Ames (talk) 13:03, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I can't think of any BBC series that are that "popular" over here. At least I don't know of anyone that I have met who follows anything on that channel. So I wouldn't think the the "Americans are bad guys" aspect would come into play. —Akrabbimtalk18:29, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know about Americans not following anything on that channel. Just ask any sci-fi fan if they follow Dr. Who. As far as the popularity of Spooks here in the US, I will agree that's it's not that popular insofar as at most it might have a cult status at the most. Until it showed up at the house, I had never heard of it. My father-in-law, who likes the BBC channel, suggested it to my wife who put it on our Netflix queue. I think I'm a bit different than most American viewers. I don't have cable or satellite. I also don't have an antenna to get local broadcast stations. I rely on Netflix for my "television" watching. I also don't fit the mold of the normal American in that I like Dr. Who, Top Gear, and now Spooks. A Venn diagram of the three genres wouldn't have a lot audience cross-over. Dismas|(talk)18:52, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Whereas in the category of "fandom" rather than "norms", you're pretty typical. You just need to find a community of fen to hang out with and you'll find a lot of people who've seen the same sort of thing as you: chances are you'll enjoy some of the other things they like, and vice versa. Just a little disambiguation: the BBC is the not same thing as the channel BBC America, although many of the programmes shown on BBC America were originally made or funded by the BBC. 86.142.231.220 (talk) 20:09, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm American and I like many BBC series (like The IT Crowd, for instance). We've watched the entire Spooks/MI-5 series, although it's mainly to see who will be killed each episode due to MI-5's habitual incompetence. So I enjoy it in much the same way as you enjoy watching a bad movie, as in the concept behind MST3K. We'll even make bets at how incompetent they will be: "I say the send the untrained operative out into the field without any backup whatsoever", "No, even they wouldn't be THAT incompetent", "Sure they would !" (and indeed, they were). StuRat (talk) 04:39, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I know: Spooks is populated with profoundly stupid spies. And you've provided a perfect example of how the BBC (corporation) is not the same as BBC America (a channel in America): The IT Crowd was not produced by the BBC, nor was it funded by the BBC, nor was it shown on the BBC (any of their four TV channels) in the UK. To someone in the UK, it is a Channel 4 programme or, if they give it more thought, a talkbackThames programme, or a Graham Linehan programme. 86.142.231.220 (talk) 17:42, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, and regarding the spoken menu, I don't think it's for accessability at all. Before you get to the menu, it shows a spy in traditional black clothing with a black ski mask sneaking into an office building. There's a voice over which is supposed to be a mission briefing type thing. He arrives at a desk and the briefing turns into a description of what you see on the desk. The voice over basically tells you what those things on the desk do, e.g. "The stack of DVDs to the left have the program files, you can access biographical data of the targets in the rolodex to the left of that, use the telephone to adjust audio settings..." There are no visual menus. Only this voice over and a pointer on the screen which you move around to each item on the desk. The first time I went through it, my wife was talking to me as the menu was loading and I had to stop her by saying, "Wait, I think this is the menu. I'm missing what all this does." It's an interesting twist on the usual menus but doesn't help the deaf or hard of hearing at all. Dismas|(talk)01:12, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting. While fun, that sounds like it goes against current BBC practice for their DVDs over here. I wonder if the region 2 DVDs do the same thing? 86.142.231.220 (talk) 17:44, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Spoken menus are designed to be accessible to blind people. Although if there was no visual option at all, it would be inaccessible to deaf and hard of hearing people, so that does seem odd. --70.129.142.174 (talk) 04:31, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The Pods do have scanners in them, they once set off the alarms and automatically locked when Jools Siviter was in them, something which amused Tom greatly ("Jolly Japes in the playground Tom!"). As I recall it's series 1 episode 5, Traitor's Gate. 130.88.171.213 (talk) 12:51, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Edy's "Frozen Dairy Dessert"
Edy's ice cream where I live (Northeast US) is labeled as "Frozen Dairy Dessert" rather than ice cream. Anyone know why this is? The ingredient list seems the same to me as "real" ice creams. Some obscure legal reason? (If anybody knows, this should be added to the article.) Staecker (talk) 14:07, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Also note that Ice cream#United States states "American federal labeling standards require ice cream to contain a minimum of 10% milk fat (about 7 grams (g) of fat per 1/2 cup [120 mL] serving) and 20% total milk solids by weight". The use of skimmed milk would mean there would be a reduced level of milk fat in the end product, thus making and classification as an ice cream doubtful (yet not impossible). Nanonic (talk) 14:44, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I've noticed here in South Africa that "ice cream" is used for the product when made with animal fat, whereas "frozen dessert" is used for the (almost identical) product made using vegetable fat. To get around this conundrum some sneaky marketers simply carry on using the term "ice cream" but then put an asterisk after it and the words "with vegetable fat" in the fine print below. Zunaid·FOREVER12:51, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This seems to be an ironic case where the healthier product, with less animal fat, is labeled as if it's somehow an inferior product. If I had it my way, traditional ice cream would be called "high animal fat ice cream", and the healthier stuff would just be called "ice cream". StuRat (talk) 15:06, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"Less animal fat" is not necessarily a good thing. For example, the partially hydrogenated vegetable oils widely used in fast food frying are much worse for you than the beef tallow they replaced. FiggyBee (talk) 15:54, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If it was up to me, the ersatz version made with vegetable oil would be labelled "frozen industrial vegetable extract with added colourings, flavourings and texture-modifiers" and the real stuff would be called "ice cream". DuncanHill (talk) 19:26, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
My headphone has developed a crack across the top (photo) and will probably break in half soon if I don't fix it. I've tried using epoxy but it just pulls away when stress is applied (ie. putting it on my head) as it doesn't bond to the plastic very well. What other methods/glue can I use to fix this? --antilivedT | C | G23:19, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'd consider gussets: thin plastic or metal rectangles on the outside and (especially) inside of the strap. Glue them on and, for security, drill a couple of holes and put in machine screws and nuts. You'll obviously have to peel the padding back for access. The problem with gluing without gussets is that there's a lot of strain concentrated in a small area. Just make the atrea bigger. PhGustaf (talk) 00:19, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
When superglue dries, it becomes solid plastic. Perhaps a resin, such as GC resin, would work -- it's used in dentistry and, although it's red in color, did a great job holding my light for 4 years so far. DRosenbach(Talk | Contribs)03:14, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You need something with a decent tensile strength. Have you tried something as simple as duck tape? As a wise man once said, "if you can't duck it, fuck it"... --Jayron3205:29, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Replacing it with something better would indeed be the best approach. If the editor is short on cash for these increasingly-expensive items, the duct tape answer is a pretty good one. Should make it last awhile. Or any kind of strong tape, really. ←Baseball BugsWhat's up, Doc?carrots→ 04:46, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
November 15
Thai pen: where to buy
Very strange one... I recently found a pen lying around somewhere, and like it a lot. I'd like to buy one, but the label is only in Thai... could someone identify the brand, or a shop in the UK that sells them, perhaps? Picture here – thanks! ╟─TreasuryTag►inspectorate─╢ 12:38, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And really, do you need to write "copyright 2009" all over the image? Nobody is going to want to pirate your blurry pen photo. --Mr.98 (talk) 13:57, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The label has some resemblance of Muji. Can't be sure though without seeing more of the pen or label. --Chan Tai Man 14:05, 15 November 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chantaiman (talk • contribs)
Well, not too likely. They range of items that a typical Japanese stationary shop carries (or any stationary shop in the Far East with strong Japanese cultural influence) are really staggering. Range of choices in Staples is okay. Sometimes, I wonder if all major UK high street stationers share a single merchandiser behind the sense. Their range of choice is absolutely boring. I wonder what is it like in other places. --Chan Tai Man 17:53, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
Mitsubishi survival/camping tool
I found a very old leather sheath/case that fits onto a leather belt. It contains a "survival tool kit" consisting of knives, fork, spoon, cork screw, scissors, screw driver, bottle opener, etc. for a total of 11 tools. The leather case is stamped JAPAN and on the front metal piece it says MITSUBISHI and shows the emblem for that manufacturer. I can't find ANY information about this tool anywhere and would appreciate some information. Thank you.72.173.64.59 (talk) 17:17, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If you have had a dream that you want to have again, what are the best ways of making it (or a similar dream) more possible? I have read a decent proportion of the Dream article but the sections I read didn't help very much, and I couldn't read it all because it's awfully long. Thanks very much in advance for any help you can provide. I left but now I'm back (talk) 00:09, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The same way that you get reoccurring nightmares, by thinking about it all day or by repeatedly being exposed to the stimulation that triggered it in the first place such as horror movies for nightmares. --121.54.2.188 (talk) 06:56, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Might be a silly question, but why are modern computer chips made from semi-conductors and not full conductors? What would happen if the latter were used instead? Acceptable (talk) 01:35, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Personally, I have found the HowStuffWorks article to be a better lay explanation of what semiconductors are and how they are used in transistors than the Wikipedia article (which, like many Wikipedia articles on technical things, get too technical too fast). The real advantage, as I understand it, of semiconductors over conductors (e.g., just copper wires), is that you can very carefully control the electrical conductivity of a semiconductor, which allows you create transistors, which act like little electronic switches. --Mr.98 (talk) 01:43, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Possibly the OP thinks Semiconductor just means "poor conductor". As the article shows they are much more than that. The key feature of a semiconductor crystal is what kind of carriers carry an electric current. Useful devices (diode, transistor and more) can be made by putting together different semiconductor materials. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 11:13, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There are two things we commonly build from semiconductors - switches and amplifiers. In both cases, you need to be able to control the conductivity of the device electrically. That's not something you can do with fully conductive materials. Without the ability to switch - we'd have no computers or other digital devices. Without the ability to amplify - there would be no analog devices. Computer chips are actually made of layers of semiconductor - but there are layers of metal (aluminium) conductors in there too. The semiconductors make the interesting switches and amplifiers - the conductors connect them together. Both are important. SteveBaker (talk) 13:41, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
For my French class, I have to answer a bunch of short-answer (one or two sentences each) questions about Le petit Nicolas, but one of those questions, about chapter 19 "Je quitte la maison", has me stumped: "Expliquez le symbolisme de ce dernier chapitre." Can you please help me? --70.134.48.115 (talk) 03:05, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm happy to translate the question: "Explain the symbolism of the chapter you have just read." (Not a direct translation, but a clear one, I hope.) Does that help? Marco polo (talk) 03:18, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Anything can be symbolic. For example, "Je quitte la maison" could be a metaphor for leaving home in senses other than the merely physical, e.g. growing up, or giving up.--Shantavira|feed me09:54, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't really think it fits at all, in terms of the numbers of buildings, the shapes, the placements (even imagining it from a different angle). --Mr.98 (talk) 16:08, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved
