Slashdot Mirror


Slashback: Periodicity, Vacuum, Strength

Slashback's updates tonight (below) bring you more information on chemically interesting furniture, old-school electronics in new-tech devices, and Brigham Young's ultra-strong building materials. Welcome to the home, car and wind-farm of the future, please mind your step.

Bratty kids get to sit near the volatile elements. Theodore Gray writes: "About a month ago there was a slashdot lively discussion about my wooden Periodic Table Table. A bunch of slashdot readers sent me elements for it: Thank you slashdot! Two people actually sent me free Ag and Pd, contrary to the jokes in the discussion. I decided the world could stand another periodic table website. Since all the eight dozen other periodic tables on the web have better reference information than mine, I used some Mathematica programs to generate links to many of them for each element. But my site is more beautiful. I'm going for science as art. Mine also has by far the best quality sample photos: High resolution, high quality macro shots of 89 samples so far."

Starts with a crank, too. ripaway writes "With all the recent stories about vaccuum tubes, I find it ironic that I stumbled on this today. Sterephile reports about the Panasonic CQ-TX5500D(link to Japanese site) car stereo that uses a vaccuum tube, with analog vu-meters. It also plays mp3 files 8-) Naturally, this is for the Japan market only."

Sounds like material for a Burning Man tent ... nm1m writes "A superstrong composite developed by Brigham Young University scientists and students has received financing for its first practical application -- mammoth wind turbine towers able to more than triple the electrical output of existing steel models. Read the story here."

We mentioned this interesting lattice-looking material a few weeks ago.

Sucking requires a context to be good or bad. Sun Tzu writes "After the recent discussion on bad software, how about a different reason for why software sucks? Maybe we programmers and users don't have it quite so bad after all."

That dadburn whippersnapper, why when I was a boy ... Junks Jerzey writes "I remember reading about Halcyon Days: Interviews with Classic Computer and Video Game Programmers five years ago in Wired News. Pretty cool stuff, with an introduction by some guy called John Romero. It was available for a long time as a commercial product that used HTML for formatting, but it's now completely online, as reported by the author."

169 comments

  1. Brigham Young by zpengo · · Score: 3, Funny

    Score one for us Latter-day Saints. Now if only the comments would last five minutes without obligatory mentions of polygamy, jello, large families, missionaries or cults, we'd have it made.

    --


    Got Rhinos?
    1. Re:Brigham Young by mph · · Score: 2, Funny
      Now if only the comments would last five minutes without obligatory mentions of polygamy, jello, large families, missionaries or cults, we'd have it made.
      Uh, too late.
    2. Re:Brigham Young by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      ... not mentioning ... cold fusion ;-)

    3. Re:Brigham Young by rjamestaylor · · Score: 1, Interesting
      Now if only the comments would last five minutes without obligatory mentions of polygamy, jello, large families, missionaries or cults, we'd have it made.

      Jello?

      How about White Supremacy, forced tithing (paycheck withholding; mandatory in Utah), Brigham Young's declaration of war against the US, the Meadows Mountain Massacre (look it up), and special Government-Issued underwear?

      "Jello"?

      --
      -- @rjamestaylor on Ello
    4. Re:Brigham Young by rjamestaylor · · Score: 1

      oops, I meant, Mountain Meadows Massacre

      --
      -- @rjamestaylor on Ello
    5. Re:Brigham Young by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now if only the comments would last five minutes without obligatory mentions of polygamy, jello, large families, missionaries or cults, we'd have it made.
      ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

      Bit late for that :) Guess you must've done a little too much LDS in the 60's ...

      LDS> moron + I == ? // Inside joke?

    6. Re:Brigham Young by rjamestaylor · · Score: 1
      Call it a troll if you want, but White Supremacy, the Morman War, Young-sanctioned massacres are more significant than jokes about Jello (or Mormon Undies).

      Funny. If my post had been references to Scientology (the new American-made religion) it would have been rated +5 Insightful.

      Anyway, since the parent brought up the subject...

      --
      -- @rjamestaylor on Ello
    7. Re:Brigham Young by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Uh... that was the University of Utah.
      NOT BYU.

    8. Re:Brigham Young by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mormons????? More Like Masons. Research the beginnings, "Mormonism" is just distorted masonry (Free-Masons, the Secret Society based off of Templars) with a friendly "Christian" Media skin. Joseph Smith was actually an "endowed" Mason way before making up the Mormon Church. Compare their secret ceremonies, they're practicaly identical!

      Don't take my word for it, look it up!

      "Pay Lay Ale, Pay Lay Ale, Pay Lay Ale,

      Oh God! Hear the words of my mouth
      Oh God! Hear the words of my mouth
      Oh God! Hear the words of my mouth
      Sign of the nail
      Sure sign of the nail"

      Mormon's are nothing more than a mind-raping cult. Get out while you can, I recently did. And boy! it's one of the best things I've ever done in my life.

      I used to totally believe and then I looked deep into what they said, and it's all full of horny old men wanting an excuse to knock up their "celestial harem". They even claim that Jesus was a polygamist! Crazy Bullshit!

    9. Re:Brigham Young by ctimes2 · · Score: 1

      forced tithing (paycheck withholding; mandatory in Utah

      eh... what?

      See... you could have had a few points there that we might have listened too, then you went and blew it on a lie.

      --
      My cube. My friend. My solace. My prison.
    10. Re:Brigham Young by jonathanjo · · Score: 2

      Score one for us Latter-day Saints. Now if only the comments would last five minutes without obligatory mentions of polygamy, jello, large families, missionaries or cults, we'd have it made.

      A limerick by Edward Abbey:

      An LDS bishop named Bundy
      Used to wed a new bride every Sunday.
      His multiple matehood
      Was ended by statehood.
      Sic transit gloria mundi.

    11. Re:Brigham Young by rjamestaylor · · Score: 1
      You misconstrued context, which was "things people might complain about Mormonism." The list was just things I'd heard or seen in that regard.

      If you noticed my follow-up I posted links to some of the issues, but not the tithing issue. Why? Because in the follow-up I was trying to bring attention to real issues (different context).

      --
      -- @rjamestaylor on Ello
    12. Re:Brigham Young by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, a lie is probably a bit strong, his fingers got over zealous and he failed to clarify. Mandatory for employees of the church/BYU and mostly in the state of Utah. I would imaging BYU Hawaii and other church run operations such as seminary employees also have it taken out but alas I have no assured knowledge of that one.

    13. Re:Brigham Young by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ~~and it's all full of horny old men wanting an excuse to knock up their "celestial harem".

      That may be true of some, but not all... even though I don't believe in the "truthfulness of the gospel" (was raised LDS), I don't like the broad generalizations.

      Mormons are: honest (some are some aren't)
      Mormon men are all horny: (aren't ALL men? Just kidding : )
      Mormons are brainwashed: Most are - but there are those who choose to participate for other reasons.
      Joseph Smith was a pervert: That one I can't argue with...
      Exmormons all hate the church: Some do, some don't

    14. Re:Brigham Young by An+Onerous+Coward · · Score: 1

      No point responding to this since it's fallen off the page, but there were two separate research outfits doing very similar work on cold fusion. One was at the U of U (Pons and Fleischmann) and the less famous one was indeed from BYU.

      --

      You want the truthiness? You can't handle the truthiness!

  2. Brigham Young and Burning Man? by namespan · · Score: 3, Funny

    Sounds like material for a Burning Man tent ... nm1m writes "A superstrong composite developed by Brigham Young University scientists and students has received financing for its first practical application -- mammoth wind turbine towers able to more than triple the electrical output of existing steel models. Read the story here."

    Wow. Brigham Young and burning man mentioned in the same sentence?

    Having attended one of the above, I can guarantee you this will not be a frequent event.

    --
    Libertarianism is rich wolves and poor sheep playing gambler's ruin for dinner.
    1. Re:Brigham Young and Burning Man? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i assume you went to the one where they molest young boys more than a catholic priest.

    2. Re:Brigham Young and Burning Man? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Considering that everyone, including church officials, can marry in the LDS church, and hence, fuck their wives, I'm shocked that so much little-boy fucking goes on at the burning man festival.

      Seriously, you always here stuff about catholic priests fucking little boys, but never about protestent clergy fucking little boys. Why? Cause they can fuck their wives. Humans need to fuck. end of story.

    3. Re:Brigham Young and Burning Man? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most child molesters are straight. A high percentage of molesters are married. Using one overgeneralization to counter another is ineffective.

      Oh and: LDS is not Protestant. It's a stretch to even call it Christian, since the majority of the core beliefs are quite separate from most Christian religions.

  3. Tube amp in a car. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Has this been done before? Any comments on ruggedization?

    1. Re:Tube amp in a car. by spamtrap · · Score: 1

      Well my 1956 Chevy had a tube radio (and every other car of the era), so I don't think it's a big deal to have tubes in cars.
      It's just new to the kids among us :-)

  4. Ag and Pd eh by GigsVT · · Score: 1

    I guess you meant Au, tsk tsk, and we trust you to build perodic tables. :)

    --
    I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
    1. Re:Ag and Pd eh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why couldn't he have meant silver? It had to gold? Answer: no!

    2. Re:Ag and Pd eh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, Ag pillock.

    3. Re:Ag and Pd eh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Argh, pay attention, he meant Ag and Au. Silver and Gold.

    4. Re:Ag and Pd eh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He meant Au rather than Pd, dolt. Ag and Au.

    5. Re:Ag and Pd eh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No he didn't you idiot. He meant what he said. Ag and Pd

      See ... donated by someone reading /.

      Learn to read pillock!

    6. Re:Ag and Pd eh by rmarll · · Score: 1

      No, he meant Ag. He provided the Au himself.

    7. Re:Ag and Pd eh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pd is more valuable than Au anyway. Now what I'd like for myself would be some Th.

    8. Re:Ag and Pd eh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      c?

    9. Re:Ag and Pd eh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Carbon?

  5. More vacuum tubes! by parkanoid · · Score: 1

    There is also a motehrboard using vacuum tubes for onboard audio, here is a link to google's cache of the page.

    1. Re:More vacuum tubes! by spoco2 · · Score: 1

      Yes, and here is the Slashdot Article about it from last week... yeash.

    2. Re:More vacuum tubes! by Afrosheen · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Posts like this make me wish for a long-overdue moderation option:

      -1 Stupid

    3. Re:More vacuum tubes! by parkanoid · · Score: 1

      It's on topic, is it not?

  6. Applications by GigsVT · · Score: 2, Funny

    or its first practical application -- mammoth wind turbine towers

    The first impractical application was for shoes that could have doors slammed on them and not injure the wearer.

    --
    I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
  7. Some of the radioactives are readily available... by Dr.+Zowie · · Score: 4, Interesting

    .. and safe to have around, so long as you don't eat them (these ones are alpha emitters; alpha particles can't penetrate a sheet of paper). They're also unregulated (in retail quantities) so you don't have to get NRC approval to have them.

    Polonium: You can buy photographic negative brushes that contain polonium, from good camera shops. The polonium gives off alpha particles that help to discharge static from the negatives as you brush them. $10-$20.

    Americium: Smoke detectors contain Americium-241. A tiny speck of it is in the detector head -- the roughly cylindrical gizmo that looks like a stamped-metal flying saucer. $9

    Uranium: pitchblende is comparatively easy to find, and of course the infamous 1970s Fiesta Ware is still to be found (though getting more difficult).

  8. Vacuum Tube Collectors by tcd004 · · Score: 2

    I've found a novel new place to find the little buggers. Take a trip 20-30 minutes out of any major metropolis and you'll find that the rural outskirts are often littered (sadly) with old appliances. Often very old appliances. I found a basket full of buggers out of a few old TV sets on a friend's property last week. They tend to weather the elements pretty well. The load I found were probably dumped at least 10 years ago and were all in perfect condition.

    Then, if you're a real man/woman, clean up the old trash.

    Meet Fake Tom Cruise

    tcd004

    1. Re:Vacuum Tube Collectors by BigBlockMopar · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I found a basket full of buggers out of a few old TV sets on a friend's property last week. They tend to weather the elements pretty well.

      Sadly, TV tubes don't tend to be very valuable. With the number of 6GH8As that I have, one would think that I should be a millionaire, but most people don't need a bandpass amplifier for a 1960s color TV.

      I've grabbed a few tubes out of the backs of radios, TVs and industrial equipment I've found mostly in (primarily) automotive junkyards. Usually the type number is washed off the glass, making the tube nearly useless. If you can tell a triode from a pentode by looking through the glass, you can make guesses and then careful analysis on the tube tester, but that assumes the tube was good to begin with.

      Only TV tube I've ever got like that which was useful and rare enough to warrant the effort was a 6BK4. Fortunately, those are pretty easy to spot through the glass, it looks like a death ray in there. (High voltage triode, designed as a shunt regulator in early (late 1950s) color TV sets.)

      --
      Fire and Meat. Yummy.
    2. Re:Vacuum Tube Collectors by Gordonjcp · · Score: 2
      In the UK at least, there are quite a few companies that import valves from the former USSR. I'm not sure where it ended up, but IIRC in the early 80's Mullard sold off their *entire* valve factory to the Soviets. They now make extremely high quality valves for all kinds of applications. Cheap, too...


      I use Sovtek (one of the brands) EL34's and ECC83's in my guitar amp, and they sound great. A quick Google will turn up the US equivalent of these, but the EL34 is a large power pentode used in the output stage, and ECC83's are the dual triodes used in the preamp.


      The Russian valve companies also produce the bloody big transmitter valves that most high-power TV and radio transmitters depend on. They can only be described as a work of art. The actual designs haven't changed much, but 20 years of development in precision engineering has improved the quality of these devices greatly. I've got a "dead" UHF transmitter output valve sitting on my bench - about the size of a coffee mug, beautifully machined aluminium thing. The whole anode is one big, shiny, CNC-machined heatsink, to dissipate the 250W or so that it produces.

  9. The Reason Software Sucks: by Skyshadow · · Score: 5, Insightful
    There's a really simple reason why Software Sucks:

    Software development is driven by clueless pointy-hairs, overreaching sales guys who make baseless promises and people who've never had a single software development class or written a single line of code

    I realized this at my last company -- I was in a high enough staff position to see the whole tragedy unfold. Features were driven by what the sales team promised, deadlines by what was written into contracts without development's input, and product managers would bypass the release process and give customers internal test versions of the software. The developers were simply issued marching orders and then ignored.

    I believe this is the way most crappy software comes about, regardless of how obvious this process is.

    Of course, leave it to the geeks and you'll get Mozilla (good, solid, standards-compliant and really, really late). There's a balance between shipping decent software and shipping a product in time to stay alive as a company. id Software has this balance, ION Storm certainly did not.

    Rant over. Please go about your business.

    --
    Every year during my review, I just pray the words "slashdot.org" aren't mentioned.
    1. Re:The Reason Software Sucks: by cpeterso · · Score: 2

      Don't forget that software is a huge house of cards built of rickety state machines. And these state machines were written by us simple humans, all the way down to the metal. I'm often surprised that it works at all. Developing a large software application is like building the Empire States Building, but you can only see 21" at one time. Well, my monitor is 21" at least.

      That said, people been harping about the "software crisis" for the past thirty years. I disagree. I think modern software is an impressive feat, when compared to the alternative (no software).

    2. Re:The Reason Software Sucks: by moosesocks · · Score: 3, Interesting

      iD is a great example of a company which knows how to please it's target audience.

      Simply put, their products work well, and they sell well. They sell well; other game developers notice this, and they license their technology.

      They please the geeks by releasing linux versions of their products, as well as releasing source code to their old engines which no longer pull in any cash for the company (after all, what good IS the source doing on a dusty pile of old disks in the closet?). They also release game sources for mod developers and such: once again, they help themselves by helping others, but they aren't loosing anything by doing this (have ANY 3rd-party games incorporated the QuakeII engine since the release of the QuakeIII engine?) This generates a highly positive image for the company.

      Now only if they could please the overprotective parents!

      --
      -- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
    3. Re:The Reason Software Sucks: by GenCuster · · Score: 1

      Half Life and its derivatives. Current on is CS: Condition Zero due out any time now.

      --
      "The poet presents his thoughts festively, on the carriage of rhythm; usually because they could not walk" Nietzsche
    4. Re:The Reason Software Sucks: by PhilHibbs · · Score: 1

      I didn't know Half Life was based on Q2. I can see the relationship in the graphical style, which I like - my main beef with Q3 and Unreal (I know they aren't related) is that everything is really glowy and shiny. Halo is even worse for this - everything looks like it's made of slightly melted metallic plastic.

    5. Re:The Reason Software Sucks: by GenCuster · · Score: 1

      Most of Halflife was based on Q1 with some custom work done on top. The network code was pulled from quake 2.

      --
      "The poet presents his thoughts festively, on the carriage of rhythm; usually because they could not walk" Nietzsche
  10. Re:Some of the radioactives are readily available. by dpp · · Score: 1

    Just don't try to make yourself a breeder reactor! :-)

    --
    This post is strictly my own opinion and not necessarily that of my employer.
  11. Off-topic curiosity by Skyshadow · · Score: 2, Interesting
    This is off-topic, but I'm curious:

    What's the difference between "mormon" and "latter day saint"? Is it simply a usage issue (aka, followers of Islam are Muslims, not Islams)? Is it an honorific type of deal? Is it simply a preference? What would John Smith or Brigham Young have referred to themselves as?

    Anyhow, serious curiosity. Reply appreciated.

    --
    Every year during my review, I just pray the words "slashdot.org" aren't mentioned.
    1. Re:Off-topic curiosity by doomdog · · Score: 1

      They are both the same, and both are nicknames.

      The full name of the church is: The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, which is where the "latter day saint" nickname comes from.

      The nickname "mormon" comes from a book called The Book of Mormon that is used and accepted as scripture only by members of the church.

    2. Re:Off-topic curiosity by doomdog · · Score: 2, Informative

      (Previous post was cut off)...

      They are both the same, and both are nicknames.

      The full name of the church is: The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, which is where the "latter day saint" nickname comes from.

      The nickname "mormon" comes from a book called The Book of Mormon that is used and accepted as scripture only by members of the church.

      Neither nickname is offensive to members of the church, although "latter-day saints" (and sometimes reduced to just "saints") is more commonly used for members referring to themselves or other members.

      "Mormon" is generally used by non-members of the church, primarily because they aren't familiar with the actual name (it is a tad long...). It is also sometimes used as a pejorative by non-members, although it is a rather strange pejorative because it isn't offensive to the recipients :)

    3. Re:Off-topic curiosity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm a member of the church. I'll try to answer your question.

      Mormon = Latter Day Saint. They are one and the same.

      The official name of the church is The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. It has the same foundation as established by Jesus Christ during his ministry on earth. (prophets, apostles, etc.) We believe that the church established/authority given by Jesus Christ was lost not long after his death with the killing of the apostles, etc (it wasn't passed on to anyone else). The church claims the authority from Christ was restored through a prophet called of God in 1820 named Joseph Smith. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints is, then, Christ's church 'restored' with the authority that Christ gave to his apostles (authority to baptize, etc.) The 'Latter Day Saints' part distinguishes this church as the 'restored' church of Jesus Christ. So.. members of the church often refer to themselves as Latter Day Saints or LDS.

      Mormon is a nickname derived from 'The Book of Mormon' - a book of scripture that church members accept as a companion scripture to the Bible. The book contains writings/history/prophecies from prophets and peoples who lived on the American continents from about 600 BC to about 400 AD. These scriptures confirm/clarify the gospel of Jesus Christ as revealed by God to those peoples. In fact, the Book of Mormon contains an account of the resurrected Christ visiting the folks in the Americas after he appeared (in resurrected form) to the apostles in the Old World. The Book of Mormon is unique to this faith and free copies are given by missionaries and members to folks that are interested so I guess at some point people started calling us Mormons and the name stuck. Recently the church has asked the media, etc to use the full name of the church instead of the nickname 'Mormon'. There's no offense in it - it's just not the name of the church.

      Make sense? :P
      Was this an essay questions, by the way?

    4. Re:Off-topic curiosity by Goonie · · Score: 2, Informative

      The Wikipedia has extensive discussion on this topic here.

      --

      Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a rigged demo
      --Andy Finkel (J. Klass?)
    5. Re:Off-topic curiosity by Zinho · · Score: 1

      At least "Mormon" is less offensive than the nickname the Church got in Russia - it tranlslates to "polygamist". Since the Saints haven't practiced polygamy for about 150 years now we get a bit touchy about that...

      --
      "Space Exploration is not endless circles in low earth orbit." -Buzz Aldrin
    6. Re:Off-topic curiosity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Jesus Christ is not a created being. He is fully God. He was present before the beginning of time.

    7. Re:Off-topic curiosity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In utah we just call them jesus jammies.

    8. Re:Off-topic curiosity by saviorsloth · · Score: 3, Informative

      I know you didn't ask, but to spread knowledge, here we go:
      Although in English, calling one who practices Islam (Submission to God) a Muslim (One who submits) seems a curious usage issue, in Arabic it makes perfect sense. Almost all words in the Arabic language are formed by 3 consonant stems. In this case, it's SLM , which implies submission. From this you form iSLaM and muSLiM in much the same way you form Christianity and Christian from the root word Christ in English.

    9. Re:Off-topic curiosity by (outer-limits) · · Score: 1

      Can we get to see the gold tablets one day, or did someone leave them in a cupboard somewhere when they moved, so they got lost?

      --

      Microsoft - Where would you like to go today, Maybe Jail?

    10. Re:Off-topic curiosity by Afrosheen · · Score: 2

      They're stored in a hidden Nazi vault code-named Golgotha. Oh and the remains of Noah's Ark, some scrolls, the original tablets god etched for Moses, the Ark of the Covenant and some other related stuff is there too.

      Living in a fantasy is much more entertaining. I think everyone should join a religion at some point.

    11. Re:Off-topic curiosity by ethereal · · Score: 1

      I thought that the Ark was in a warehouse outside Washington? Or Golgotha the name of that warehouse? They weren't very clear about that at the end of Raiders of the Lost Ark.

      --

      Your right to not believe: Americans United for Separation of Church and

    12. Re:Off-topic curiosity by carlos_benj · · Score: 1

      Don't forget "LDS" when mentioning acceptable nicknames. Also, there are pockets of mormonism that still practive polygamy even though the official stance of the church has changed.

      --

      --

      As a matter of fact, I am a lawyer. But I play an actor on TV.

    13. Re:Off-topic curiosity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If they practice polygamy then they aren't mormons even if they claim to be. Those that practice polygamy are excomunicated.

  12. Halcyon Days by q-soe · · Score: 4, Informative

    This is indeed an excellent read and well worth the time - if you want some other online books which discuss the earlier days of computing and hacker culture try these

    Free As In Freedom - Sam Williams - A biography of Richard Stallman and an excellent read for those who would like to understand the man a bit more or even understand how GNU and Open Source actually happen. I reccomend this to even people who dislike RMS (as i did) as you will understand the man from a new perspective

    The Cathedral and the Bazzar- Eric Raymond - This book has been condemmed and praised by many and provides an intersting look at open source and the different models of software - worth a read

    Underground : Hacking, madness and obsession on the electronic frontier - Sulette Dreyfuss - A great look inside the world of the cracker and very intersting and compelling to read

    There are heaps more out there - post them as you find them - BTW if you have a bit of cash to spend i reccomend Hackers by Steven Levy and Fire in the Valley by freiburger and swain for 2 more great books on computer and PC history

    --
    I refuse to argue with Anonymous Cowards - if you want a discussion get an account....
    1. Re:Halcyon Days by unicron · · Score: 2, Interesting

      This may be a little off topic, but Halcyon by Orbital is such an awesome, completely beautiful song.

      The word Halcyon, if you care, refers to a hallucionigen(sp?) that was used as a pain medication in dentist's offices a long time ago, but turned out to be incredibly addictive. The song is about the Hartnoll brothers dealing with their mothers addiction.

      I know, off topic, but if you've ever heard the song you'd agree with me, and the word is hardly common english, so I have to get my plugs in when I can.

      --
      Finally, math books without any of that base 6 crap in them.
    2. Re:Halcyon Days by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know what you mean.

      On the subject of the subject line though, I'd like to post my appreciation of the Days Inn hotel chain. They're awesome. After a day of travelling you always feel welcome walking into the lobby and then getting into your room, which is always clean and well furnished.

      There are better chains, but Days Inn aint bad.

    3. Re:Halcyon Days by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      I find your reccomendations very intersting.

    4. Re:Halcyon Days by tdye · · Score: 2

      The word (a la dictionary.com means:
      idyllically calm and peaceful; suggesting happy tranquillity; "a halcyon atmosphere" 2: joyful and carefree; "halcyon days of youth" 3: marked by peace and prosperity; "a golden era"; "the halcyon days of the clipper trade"

      Which is probably why the dentists named their drug after it.

  13. Re:Some of the radioactives are readily available. by GigsVT · · Score: 3, Informative

    These guys are pretty good for buying small uranium ore samples to test geiger counters with. They also stock uranium doped glass marbles that really light up under black light. Pretty cool radioactive toys.

    --
    I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
  14. LDS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    --I'm not LDS, but we follow their credo of being prepared, even better. We have two years+ of stored food here, ability to grow all we need essentially, yada, yada, yada. I also like how they help people over the planet without much fanfare or notice. I've seen the warehouses full of goods that gets shipped to poor or disaster areas, every penny donated. Kudos to you folks!

  15. That car stereo.... ugh! by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I mean, sure there's a market for a high end tube amp in cars. The car, that rather noisy accoustical nightmare that, no matter how you try, you will never ever be able to fit good speakers in. Oh well... but why does the thing have to look so damn.... tacky? Come on. Analog VU meters and the tube exposed, combined with what looks to be a gold finish. Almost as ugly as a Marantz set.

    Not that I think modern car stereos look good... give me those they made about 5-10 years ago: decent button layout, single color displays, and no frigging light-shows. *sighs*

    --
    If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    1. Re:That car stereo.... ugh! by Noel · · Score: 1

      Then you need to check out the Nakamichi mobile equipment. No flash, just good sound...

    2. Re:That car stereo.... ugh! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No kidding...

      Awhile back I was looking for an in-dash CD/MP3 player and after looking around the store I had to ask, "Do you have any systems for adults?".

    3. Re:That car stereo.... ugh! by mlh1996 · · Score: 1
      Not that I think modern car stereos look good... give me those they made about 5-10 years ago: decent button layout, single color displays, and no frigging light-shows. *sighs*

      No kidding. I don't know where I'm gonna get another Denon 970 for my new car. This is the second time I've traded a car in without pulling the head unit thinking, "There's gotta be something better available, now." *dumb, dumb, dumb*

      --
      Lack of creativity is no excuse for not having a .sig
    4. Re:That car stereo.... ugh! by BigBlockMopar · · Score: 2

      Come on. Analog VU meters and the tube exposed, combined with what looks to be a gold finish. Almost as ugly as a Marantz set.

      Hey! At least there's solid engineering in the Marantz. This is just something shiny for the home-boyz who think a CD hanging from the rear-view mirror is a status symbol (or helps them avoid laser speed guns, something else I heard and gave me a much-needed laugh).

      VU meters... what, the thing is a recorder, too? No? Then what do you need VU meters for?

      Not that I think modern car stereos look good... give me those they made about 5-10 years ago: decent button layout, single color displays, and no frigging light-shows. *sighs*

      Got two that I love. There's a Clarion double-shaft in my 1976 Dodge Ram. The thing is gorgeous - simple button layout, good digital tuner picks up WRVA in Richmond VA all the way from Toronto, Canada, good cassette deck, line inputs for when I finally get around to stuffing a low-end machine behind the seat as an MP3 player. And it drives the 6x9s in my doors hard enough that when I play Black Sabbath, all the little children in the Hondas get scared. (Generally not wise to eff around with a Black Sabbath fan who drives a 25-year-old pickup truck.)

      (Pre dot-com meltdown fond memories: driving that truck through the financial district after work on a nice summer's day, stuck in a traffic jam, windows rolled down, stereo playing Paranoid loudly, my hand resting on the driver's side mirror, wind blowing up the sleeve into my Armani suit jacket. The non-sequitur was enough that guys in Mercedes, Porsches, Acuras, etc. did a double-take. :) )

      The other one that I love is a 12-year-old Alpine pull-out CD player and matching cassette deck. I got them both out of cars I bought for parts and then junked along the way. I keep both under the driver's seat in my winter beater and pop in the one for the media I want to listen to. Nice tuners, well laid out controls, no blinkenlights for das dummkopfen.

      --
      Fire and Meat. Yummy.
    5. Re:That car stereo.... ugh! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      US Amps, out of Gainesville, FL has these and they sound PHENOMENAL.

      And, the customers WANT the VU meters and so forth, according to the market research at US Amps.

  16. Slightly OT: Programming and Artwork... by NanoGator · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "People are understandably reluctant to add real engineering discipline to software development..."

    I found this 'alternative reason to why software sucks...' to be true with 3D Animation as well.

    As a hobby, I assist people entering into the world of 3D art. My goal is to teach them professional methods to achieve their goals. What I've found interesting, though, is that a lot of them are reluctant to actually design what it is they are building or animating.

    With new recruits, I can almost never get them to actually sit down with some paper and design the robot they want to build, for example. What they try to do is just sit down and build it. I'll hear stuff like "Oh I can't draw...", or "It's faster if I just sit down and build it. I know what I want it to look like."

    The results? Well, the models they invent are ... well.. ameteurish. But when they make a model that they have lots of reference of, like the starship Enterprise for example, then they look top notch. Even presented with such a startling comparison, they still refuse to do the design work. Why? Because it adds overhead to their project.

    I really think what happens is that they have in inaccurate impression of what being a 3D artist really entails. This is similar to what Ray said in his post about why software sucks. The sad thing is that until they start taking approaches like designing your model, they'll always look like a 3D newb.

    Is there a solution? Well, I have an idea as to how to help both the 3D Artists and the Programmers out there: Make it clear that there is more to their job than just poking keys. I had no idea what all a Software Engineer (I used to call them Programmers...) did until I got a job at a software company. I had the impression in my mind that all they did was write code. The thought of them doing things like 'designing the UI' was alien to me.

    Heck, before I got a job doing 3D, I thought all I had to do was build a model as fast as I possibly could. I expected they'd give me 3 days to do what would normally take me a week. I had no idea that they'd actually give me time to design and understand my model before building it. I spent over a year trying to be faster in LW, only to find that faster isn't what they wanted.

    In short, I think it's very important to alter the perception out there about what a job really entails. If somebody aspiring to be a programmer knows that they need to pay attention to design and UI, then they'll be far more observant about those aspects during their education. If I had known how much learning to draw would help me with my 3D work, I would have done a lot more drawing exercises in high school.

    --
    "Derp de derp."
  17. Periodic Table Eh? by KanSer · · Score: 1

    "That kid is on the Europium again!"

    --
    • MOD PARENT UP by Anonymous Coward Wednesday April 20, @4:20
  18. Taller Wind Turbines, good or bad? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Since it is three times taller than the usual turbines, that means it'll be visible three times farther away, so it will be an eyesore to nine times as many people. Wouldn't you get just as much power by building three of the normal size turbines instead?

    1. Re:Taller Wind Turbines, good or bad? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All bets are off with local geography (hills etc), but based on the curvature of the earth, how far you can see is proportional to the square root of how high up you are, Therefore 3 times as high means you can see sqrt(3) times as far, for 3 times the area.

      This is easily verified. Draw a circle. That is the Earth. Draw a right-angled triangle with one corner at the center of the Earth, and with the right angle tangent to the surface of the Earth. Label the radius of the Earth R. The height above the Earth that you get h. And the distance that you see to the surface of the Earth (which is approximately the distance along the center of the Earth) d.

      Apply the Pythagorean Theorem and you quickly find that (R+h)^2=R^2+d^2. From which 2Rh+h^2=d^2. On the left hand side R is much larger than h, so to an excellent approximation d is sqrt(2Rh). Or put another way, the distance you can see is proportional to the square root of your height.

      (Incidentally if you live near the ocean and have access to either a boat or a plane it is possible to use this to measure the radius of the Earth!)

    2. Re:Taller Wind Turbines, good or bad? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, because the power output goes up at a greater than linear rate with the prop diameter. I could dig up the formula, but I can't be arsed. I think it's (approximately) linear with area, so quadratic with radius, so (if my brain isn't completely smoked) that's nine times as much power from three times the radius.

  19. Re:Now this I can answer... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, Mormons do not particularly mind being called Mormons. At least that is what the missionaries who stand outside a nearby McDonald's say.

  20. Re:Some of the radioactives are readily available. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Don't forget tobacco. The tobacco plant likes to collect elements which tend to be radioactive (polonium in particular). Smoking a pack exposes you to more radiation than a chest x-ray.

  21. Re:Some of the radioactives are readily available. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Lighting up under black light is neat, but unless I'm much mistaken that is due to fluorescence and not radioactivity.

  22. Vacuum Tubes in Cars - Car Radios in the 1940s. by BigBlockMopar · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Has this been done before? Any comments on ruggedization?

    Yes. Plenty.

    The car radio was not invented with the transistor. Motorola, who was originally founded to make "Motor Victrolas", ie. car audio, branched into semiconductors almost as soon as it was seen that they had practical aspects in car radios.

    In the beginning, car radios had tubes. Tubes require filament power as well as the power and B+ power. The parallel would be a transistor radio which needs a 9V battery (main power) to power the radio and a whole bunch of 1.5V D cells (filament power) to keep the transistors warm enough to work.

    The filaments of appropriate tubes will run happily off 12V, but they still need something from about 90V to 250V for main power (known as B+ or plate supply). Back then, cars ran off 6V or 12V electrical systems, and this had to provide sufficient voltage for the radio. Before transistors and switching power supplies, there was only one way: the vibrator.

    Sexual references aside, a vibrator is basically a relay wired to break its circuit when it's turned on. The raspy buzz chopped a circuit on and off, which made DC from the car's electrical system into a pulsetrain which drove a small transformer. The transformer stepped up the voltage and it was rectified in the usual way for the era: a small recifier tube. Of course, this was highly inefficient and noisy.

    Never mind that the car radio would take several amps while it was on, and these were in the days before alternators. Less efficient generators and battery technology meant that leaving the radio on for too long while in traffic would run down the battery to the point where the ignition system stopped - and so did you.

    Durability was another issue. Tubes are held in their sockets by friction, and would have a tendency to vibrate out of their sockets, making the radio fail. The "loctal" base was invented to deal with this. It was a base design where the tube's keyway was notched and would hold the tube with a spring on the base. They're a pain in the ass since they always corrode in the locked position and you often break the tube trying to get it out of the socket.

    Tubes are basically light bulbs with a whole bunch of closely-spaced wires, grids and sheetmetal electrodes. If they move relative to each other, the electrical characteristics of the tube change - and therefore so does the behavior of the radio. This effect is called "microphonics". Not to mention vibration fatigue causing shorts, cracked glass and vacuum loss, etc. Tubes don't like vibrations. If don't believe me, hit your monitor a few times.

    While I love tubes, a car stereo is about the last place they belong.

    On this site you can see what a 1930s car radio looked like. Note that the radio was too large to fit in the dashboard and often ended up in the passenger's footwell. A "control head" was a set of remote volume and tuning knobs on the dashboard; they were usually connected by a cable arrangement similar to speedometer or bicycle brake cables.

    Background? I collect and restore antique TV sets and 1960s/1970s musclecars. Lots of my friends are into 1930s and 1940s cars, and often get me to fix their vintage tube car radios so that the full experience of driving a car of that era can be preserved.

    Sterephile reports about the Panasonic CQ-TX5500D(link to Japanese site) car stereo that uses a vaccuum tube, with analog vu-meters. It also plays mp3 files 8-) Naturally, this is for the Japan market only."

    Even with a modern DC-DC converter powering the B+ circuit, what a profoundly stupid idea.

    1. Tubes don't like vibrations. Putting tubes into cars is like putting a hard disk drive into a hardware store paint mixer. If they were really concerned about sound quality, they wouldn't put tubes there.
    2. Lightbulbs always burn out when you turn them on or off. So do tube filaments. Count how many times you started your car today. The tube won't last long.
    3. It's for use in a *car*. I love cars. And I love audio. But a car is a resonant steel can. You cannot change its nature and have it remain a car. Therefore, good sound in a car is not possible. You can have good sound, or a good car, but not good sound *in* a car. I will, however, concede that there is such thing as good sound *for* a car, ie. given the limitations of the venue. But the limiting factor there remains the venue - the car, not the fact that your preamplifier doesn't use Mullard 12AX7s. That's kinda like putting a 3" exhaust tip on your Honda Civic's 1" diameter engine-to-tailpipe exhaust system and somehow thinking that you've reduced the restriction.

    While I really like the fact that it plays MP3s, this is just more stuff for homiez with gold chains, small cars, and smaller penises.

    Can't wait until "Da Bass" people get their hands on this. A car stereo which can bounce quarters on the roof of the car will be more than sufficient to make the tube microphonic. Feedback between the subs and the tube will result in blown subs, toasted amplifiers, and no more din of license plates rattling on every rusting 1984 Prelude at every traffic light.

    --
    Fire and Meat. Yummy.
    1. Re:Vacuum Tubes in Cars - Car Radios in the 1940s. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well personally I think tubes do belong in the car radio. They have a much more richer and reboust sound to me and yes i can tell the difference but the point must be taken lightly because like you said a car is a hunk of steal that just drowns any good sound system this coming from a audio and car freak. But nothing sounds better than a tube system warming up much like a 2.3T revving up to 7Krpm yes they both make me weak in the knees

    2. Re:Vacuum Tubes in Cars - Car Radios in the 1940s. by BigBlockMopar · · Score: 4, Funny

      But nothing sounds better than a tube system warming up much like a 2.3T revving up to 7Krpm yes they both make me weak in the knees

      Feh. 2.3L. Talk to me when you can afford to gas up a real man's car.

      440 cubic inches. Conventionally-aspirated Detroit iron. 7.2L of V8 power, and it propels my 4,000lb 1976 Dodge Ram down the 1/4 mile in 13.8 seconds. 12.8 seconds when I take the crushed Honda Accord out of the back.

      2.3L. Sheesh. If I stomp on my gas pedal, I'll suck the block right out of your little front-wheel-drive wimpmobile and get it stuck in my air filter.

      Well personally I think tubes do belong in the car radio. They have a much more richer and reboust sound to me and yes i can tell the difference

      Sure you can. Absolutely. What's the cause of the richer and more robust sound?

      Hey, as a self-proclaimed vacuum tube expert ready to tell me all about why tubes are so well suited to a vibration-prone environment, why don't you solve a lifelong mystery for me and tell me what the filament voltage of a 50C5 is?

      Or regale the readers of Slashdot with a gripping explanation of how there's *one* tube in the car radio, but presumably it carries audio for left and right (two distinct) channels.

      but the point must be taken lightly because like you said a car is a hunk of steal
      • Steal: take someone's property without their permission.
      • Steel: alloy of iron (ferrum) and carbon.
      that just drowns any good sound system this coming from a audio and car freak

      Yup. One of the pillars of a good sound system - and chief benefits of a tube preamplifier - is a low noise floor. That's kinda hard to achieve with tire noise, suspension noise, transmission noise, differential noise, wind noise and exhaust noise all conspiring to make your car a noisy place. At least 40dB in the quietest luxury car. In order to achieve signal to noise ratio of 100 (the S/N of a $200 CD player) inside your car, your stereo system would have to be somewhat louder than a Saturn V rocket at take-off. Do the math... if you can.

      --
      Fire and Meat. Yummy.
    3. Re:Vacuum Tubes in Cars - Car Radios in the 1940s. by io333 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Or regale the readers of Slashdot with a gripping explanation of how there's *one* tube in the car radio, but presumably it carries audio for left and right (two distinct) channels.

      The tube is a twin triode.

    4. Re:Vacuum Tubes in Cars - Car Radios in the 1940s. by alexburke · · Score: 1

      Jeezus Aitch Christ, Lawrence! What don't you know?! ;)

    5. Re:Vacuum Tubes in Cars - Car Radios in the 1940s. by BigBlockMopar · · Score: 2

      The tube is a twin triode.

      Of course it is. Elements look too small to be a 12AX7 or a 12AU7. I think it's a 12AT7.

      Could actually be a twin tetrode, pentode or any number of amplifying tubes, but the 9-pin miniature base (instead of a compactron) was a dead giveaway.

      The questions were entirely for the benefit of the child with the poor spelling and grammar.

      The filament voltage of a 50B5 is very easy, since you didn't jump at that one. American tubes conform to a standard numbering system and the 50B5/50C5 (which did I choose again?) were some of the most common tubes, produced in the millions for "All American Five" (5-tube, series-filament, AC/DC-power, inexpensive and reliable) table radios. It's not a difficult, obscure or exceptional tube; in fact, probably one of the easiest. If you knew the twin triode, you already know the answer.

      --
      Fire and Meat. Yummy.
    6. Re:Vacuum Tubes in Cars - Car Radios in the 1940s. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      this is just more stuff for homiez with gold chains, small cars, and smaller penises.
      Ah, so that's why they're only selling it in Japan...
    7. Re:Vacuum Tubes in Cars - Car Radios in the 1940s. by Toshito · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'm tired of seeing you brag about your pickup rocket.

      Your 440 cid engine was rated at 225 HP @4000rpm and 330 lb/feet torque @2400 rmp in 1976.

      Your truck weight a little over 4000 lb.

      Putting that into the cartest software (with a 3 speed automatic) gives a 1/4 mile time of 16.7s.

      To obtain the number you gave, 12.8s, would require you to have a MUCH more powerful engine, and at least drag slicks.

      Now, let's take a 2.3l turbo engine, say in a Merkur Xr4Ti (american version of the ford sierra). It put out 170hp, and it can do 16s on the 1/4 mile. And that's an old 80's car.

      Explain to me then how can you claim such numbers. Can I see a time slip, a video, some way to calculate this?

      Understand me, I love big engines and the sound of a 400+ cid car shredding it's tires at the red light...

      Muscle cars are quick, but when you compare them to the modern cars, they tend to show their age. A modern Nissan Altima with it's 260Hp 3.5l V-6 can outrun a lot of old muscle cars... and it's a family sedan. Or take the small 5 liter engine in a BMW M5, 400hp!!!

      It's just the technology improving year after year. I would love to see what a modern engine with 440 cid could spit out, 700hp? It would be a blast (and maybe a little dangerous) to drive.

      Cheers!
      (and your are welcome to correct my spelling, english is my second language)

      --
      Try it! Library of Babel
    8. Re:Vacuum Tubes in Cars - Car Radios in the 1940s. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Ah, so that's why they're only selling it in Japan...

      The Japanese don't just *like* anime, they invented it. Their lack of taste as an ethnic group is therefore a foregone conclusion.

    9. Re:Vacuum Tubes in Cars - Car Radios in the 1940s. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "But nothing sounds better than a tube system warming up much like a 2.3T revving up to 7Krpm yes they both make me weak in the knees"

      Watching Will and Grace and thinking about being Jack's bitch makes you weak in the knees.

  23. Vacuum Tube? by sheepab · · Score: 2, Funny

    What are those, they use em in Hoover Windtunnels right?

    1. Re:Vacuum Tube? by buck_wild · · Score: 1

      No, I think they use them in the Hoover Dammit.

      "Uh, is this a Goddamn?" Gotta be the funniest line of the whole movie.

      --
      If all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.
  24. In short, yes (mostly) by Zinho · · Score: 2, Offtopic

    The official name of the church is "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints". [1] As you can expect, that's quite a mouthful so a nickname is necessary. "Latter-Day Saint (LDS) Church" is acceptable, and the church Presidency supports it. Likewise, it's appropriate to call members of the LDS church "Latter-Day Saints".

    "Mormon" [2] is a nickname that was given to the church and its members by others, who knew that we considered the Book of Mormon to be scripture [3] (but didn't know much else about us). This is not a nickname sanctioned by the church Presidency, but most of the church members tolerate it. The problem is that using the name "Mormon" for the church and its members makes it sound like we worship Mormon, or that the church was perhaps founded by Mormon; neither is the case.

    What's worse, there are several groups that claim to be "Mormons" - most notably the "Reformed LDS Church" and the polygamists [4] in southern Utah (who I think call themselves "Fundamentalist Mormons", or something like that) - who have little to do with the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. For the most part these other "Mormon" churches are splinter groups formed by people who left the church (or were kicked out) because they felt that they should be leading the flock instead of the current Presidency. The legitimate leaders are understandably anxious to make a clear distinction between the real LDS church and the others that call themselves "Mormons".

    I personally respond to either and don't make a big deal about it in most cases as long as I'm sure that there's no confusion about what people mean by it.

    [1] The "Latter Days" referred to are the present times. The members of Christ's church in His day were called saints, and members of His church today are called "Latter-Day Saints to distinguish the "former" church from the "latter".

    [2] Mormon was a real person, a prophet-historian who compiled the Book of Mormon. It's his book, so it's named after him.

    [3] We recognize the Bible as scripture, too. There are also a couple of other books of scripture that we use: the Doctrine and Covenants records revelations given to Joseph Smith, the first prophet of the latter days; and the Pearl of Great Price, which records revelations recived by Moses and Abraham, found and translated by Joseph Smith.

    [4] Polygamy used to be practiced by the LDS church, but was discontinued about 150 years ago. Anyone church member who practices it modernly is promptly excommunicated. So Tom Green, on trial for various sex crimes against one of his underage wives has nothing whatever to do with the LDS church, regardless of how much he may protest that he is a "Mormon".

    --
    "Space Exploration is not endless circles in low earth orbit." -Buzz Aldrin
    1. Re:In short, yes (mostly) by doomdog · · Score: 1

      You are completely off-base.. Of course, if you really believed what you posted, and actually had the courage to stand behind your spewings, you wouldn't have posted as an AC -- emphasis on "Coward"....

    2. Re:In short, yes (mostly) by happy*nix · · Score: 1

      If your really curious, start with http:\\lds.org or http:\\mormon.org.

      I guess there always has to be opposition in all things. It's important to remember standing AGAINST something is not the same as standing FOR something.

      i.e. I'm not anti-microsoft, I'm pro-*nix.

      --
      Gone to my happy place.
    3. Re:In short, yes (mostly) by Aewin · · Score: 1

      Why dont you try both kind of pages, those from the church and those not from the church, and try to guess which is telling the truth. Just look which of them looks like selling a product, just like kfc or pizza hut. Look what they are selling, look how much they tell about the church in terms of the real life inside the church, and finally look how much they talk about the history of the church, and then form your own opinion, i dont hate the church im sad about how much they think they need to lie to keep their faith.

      A.

    4. Re:In short, yes (mostly) by An+Onerous+Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting
      "The official name of the church is "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints"."
      And the prepositional mangling begins.

      What's worse, there are several groups that claim to be "Mormons" - most notably the "Reformed LDS Church" and the polygamists [4] in southern Utah (who I think call themselves "Fundamentalist Mormons", or something like that) - who have little to do with the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. For the most part these other "Mormon" churches are splinter groups formed by people who left the church (or were kicked out) because they felt that they should be leading the flock instead of the current Presidency. The legitimate leaders are understandably anxious to make a clear distinction between the real LDS church and the others that call themselves "Mormons".
      The problems with this statement are going to be tough to clear up for those just joining the Mormon debates. When Joseph Smith died, he threw the proverbial boquet into the drunken bridesmaid horde. He never left clear instructions on who was to succeed him, and he had a tendency to make crazy promises to keep people happy. In short, there were about ten people who thought they should lead the Church, each with their own valid claims of authority (see "Origins of Power," by D. Michael Quinn).

      Brigham Young just happened to be really charismatic, and got the majority of the early Mormons to accept his authority above other claimants (Sidney Rigdon, James Strang, Samuel Smith, Joseph Smith III). The victors rewrote the history books to demonstrate their legitimacy.

      If you want a truly unambiguous name, call yourself the Brighamites. Each of the other splinter groups (gun-toting polygamists included) have every bit as much right to call themselves Mormons/Latter-day Saints as Brigham Young's followers do.

      [2] Mormon was a real person, a prophet-historian who compiled the Book of Mormon. It's his book, so it's named after him.
      Yes, Mormon was a real person. And the Native Americans really are dark-skinned Jews, and the early inhabitants of this continent really did use steel in large quantities, and really raised cattle and corn and wheat, and really rode horses into battle. The fact that there's no more archaeological evidence for any of these cultural items shouldn't unsettle you. After all, you have a testimony.

      [3] We recognize the Bible as scripture, too. There are also a couple of other books of scripture that we use: the Doctrine and Covenants records revelations given to Joseph Smith, the first prophet of the latter days; and the Pearl of Great Price, which records revelations recived by Moses and Abraham, found and translated by Joseph Smith.
      According to the Articles of Faith (also LDS scripture), Mormons believe the Bible to be the Word of God insofar as it has been translated correctly. But Mormons also believe that the modern Bible was so thoroughly mangled by "wicked and corrupt priests" that the Bible actually became a stumbling block to those who wanted to find God. Smith made numerous revisions to the Bible to make it more theologically acceptable to him (and included a prophecy of his own birth). Of course, none of these revisions match up with the earliest copies of the books of the Bible.

      As a die-hard atheist, I could really care less. But Mormons get a lot of flack from mainstream Christians for minimizing the differences between themselves and traditional Christianity, especially when they smell a conversion.

      Oh, the Book of Abraham--purported to have been the writings of Abraham, the Patriarch of Israel--were really an Egyptian funeral book called "The Book of Breathings," written for a man named Horus. Joseph Smith got suckered, and so did his (now 12,000,000 strong) flock.

      [4] Polygamy used to be practiced by the LDS church, but was discontinued about 150 years ago. Anyone church member who practices it modernly is promptly excommunicated. So Tom Green, on trial for various sex crimes against one of his underage wives has nothing whatever to do with the LDS church, regardless of how much he may protest that he is a "Mormon".
      Polygamy was actually discontinued less than 100 years ago, in 1905. Mormons generally claim that the practice ended in 1890, but plural marriages were still being approved by the President of the Church and other apostles for fifteen years afterwards. Finally, with the second Manifesto, the Church got serious. Now they don't even allow plural marriage in areas of the world where it's legal.

      To make things more complicated, Mormons still believe in polygamy in the afterlife. A widower can choose to be married to a second woman "for eternity" without affecting his marriage to his first wife.

      Correction: Tom Green has nothing to do with the clean-cut young men on bicycles, the pretty white buildings you see from the freeway, the 2002 Winter Olympics, the commercials on TV for a free Bible, or anything else put out by the Corporation of the President. But in their zeal to distance themselves from polygamy, your presidency ignores the fact that early LDS theology left the door wide open for the Tom Greens of the world. The word "Mormon" can and does encompass all the supposedly illegitimate splinter groups.

      The basic feeling of the Corporate Church towards the term "Mormons" is as follows: You can't use it to refer to us. You can't use it to refer to anybody else. They've tried some laughable PR blitzes to change the common usage, and it's never worked.
      --

      You want the truthiness? You can't handle the truthiness!

    5. Re:In short, yes (mostly) by An+Onerous+Coward · · Score: 3, Troll
      I guess there always has to be opposition in all things. It's important to remember standing AGAINST something is not the same as standing FOR something.
      Here's some opposition for you:
      teleport.com/~packham/
      exmormon.org
      Infidels
      LDS4U: Beat the missionaries at their own game.
      Utah Lighthouse Ministry


      But don't fret. Joseph Smith himself loved persecution:
      "Come on! ye prosecutors! ye false swearers! All hell, boil over! Ye burning mountains, roll down your lava! for I will come out on top at last. I have more to boast of than ever any man had. I am the only man that has ever been able to keep a whole church together since the days of Adam. A large majority of the whole have stood by me. Neither Paul, John, Peter, nor Jesus ever did it. I boast that no man ever did such a work as I. The followers of Jesus ran away from Him; but the Latter-day Saints never ran away from me yet...When they can get rid of me, the devil will also go." (History of the Church, Vol. 6, p. 408, 409)
      --

      You want the truthiness? You can't handle the truthiness!

    6. Re:In short, yes (mostly) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As a die-hard atheist, I could really care less.

      So, then why do you have so much to say about it?

  25. Re:Some of the radioactives are readily available. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now hold on just a minute. Since when are these isotopes only alpha emitters? It is true that the alpha particles emitted will not penetrate past the already-dead part of your skin, but I do happen to know offhand that Americium-241 and the Uranium isotopes emit gamma radiation as well. And if you don't believe me, test these samples with a Geiger counter.

    To see how well the radiation penetrates through human flesh, you can try wrapping your hand around the Geiger tube and bringing them close to the material. You don't have to be too careful with the Fiesta Ware of course... the lead in the glaze is probably worse for you than the radiation. But please bear in mind that these isotopes often emit more than just an alpha particle! If you look at a table of isotopes you will see that they often alpha decay to an excited state, which then releases a photon to go to the ground state. (aka an isomeric transition)

  26. Yes and no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    To some of us, the best way to model an algorithm is to write the C code for it.

    1. Re:Yes and no by NanoGator · · Score: 2

      An algorithm is not an entire program. In 3D terms, an algorithm is like a piece of a model or a texture map.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    2. Re:Yes and no by AVee · · Score: 1

      Might be true, but you shouldn't write the algorithm before you designed what is should do and how it should be used within the larger program.

  27. Why software sucks by Animats · · Score: 4, Insightful
    The biggest single problem is C, with its casual attitude towards arrays and pointers. So many thousands of bugs stem from this. The main justification for Java and C# is increased safety. If it weren't for the safety problem, there would be no need for two more languages so much like C. That's a major indictment of C right there.

    The second big problem is weak interprocess communication. UNIX is partly responsible for this. Interprocess communication was retrofitted to UNIX in several different ways, most of them bad. The basic problem is that what you usually want is a subroutine call, but what the OS gives you is an I/O operation. If you build a subroutine call on top of an I/O operation, (think Sun RPC, or CORBA) it's slow. This leads to big, monolithic programs that crash all at once, instead of little, intercommunicating ones that contain the damage caused by a bug. It doesn't have to be this way. Take a look at QNX to see this done right.

    The third big problem is DMA. The idea that the peripherals see raw address space and can read and write to it dates from the early days of minicomputers, when it required fewer transistors to do it that way. Mainframes had "channels", which connected peripherals to memory in a controlled, secure way. You could take full control of a peripheral on an IBM mainframe, run a driver as a user program, and still not be able to crash the system. With channelized I/O, drivers aren't as privileged. They can only mess up their own peripheral, not the whole system. This improves system stability considerably. IBM tried to put channelized hardware in PCs, but at the same time, they tried to increase their profit margins on peripherals. This killed the IBM PS/2.

    Fourth, Microsoft likes a complicated OS. Ballmer has said so publicly. If PCs came with channelized hardware and a microkernel in ROM, the OS would have far less to do, and would be more of a commodity. There'd be alternatives, like KDE and Gnome on Linux, all of which ran the same applications. Standardized interprogram communication, enforced by the kernel and hardware, would make components more pluggable. All this would dent the Microsoft monopoly severely.

    Down at the bottom, at the foundations of personal computers, those are the problems. And that's why software sucks.

    1. Re:Why software sucks by janda · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Um, no. The major reason why software sucks:

      People don't know what they want.

      The secondary reason why software sucks:

      The "marketing" department.

      Put the two together and you get the "office paperclip".

      --
      Karma: Food Fight (Mostly affected by Date Plate).
    2. Re:Why software sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Blow me, troll.

    3. Re:Why software sucks by afidel · · Score: 2

      Java and C# are not like C, they are maybe similar to C++, but not C.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    4. Re:Why software sucks by aminorex · · Score: 2

      > The biggest single problem is C

      The alternative to C is not Java, it's
      assembly. In the absence of C the situation
      would be profoundly worse. So you've seen
      a few misapplications of C. That hardly
      justifies an indictment of the language itself.

      > The second big problem is weak interprocess
      > communication.

      Solaris Doors are really cool. They allow you
      to call into another user-space process. But
      I disagree in part. Even if I were to accept
      that RPC is the primary function of IPC -- which
      I don't: although the importance of RPC has
      grown over the years most of the bytes going over
      IPC are raw data flow, even today --
      network-transparency requires that the RPC be
      implemented over an I/O layer. Really, the
      only reason anyone uses local domain sockets
      is to pass capabilities! Besides which, there
      are plenty of RPC APIs on top of network I/O.
      How could their implementation model be impacting
      the quality of software so negatively as to
      merit being in your quirky list?

      UNIX is partly responsible for this. Interprocess communication was retrofitted to UNIX in several different ways, most of them bad. The basic problem is that what you usually want is a subroutine call, but what the OS gives you is an I/O operation. If you build a subroutine call on top of an I/O operation, (think Sun RPC, or CORBA) it's slow. This leads to big, monolithic programs that crash all at once, instead of little, intercommunicating ones that contain the damage caused by a bug. It doesn't have to be this way. Take a look at QNX to see this done right.

      --
      -I like my women like I like my tea: green-
    5. Re:Why software sucks by dutky · · Score: 2
      The biggest single problem is C, with its casual attitude towards arrays and pointers


      While C pointers are the bane of undergrads and junior programmers world wide, the resulting bugs are squashed quickly in production environments. Most of the big, hairy, bugs are both more mundane and more subtle: complex and misunderstood 'business logic', inadequately tested reporting and summarization routines, databases without any consitency checking, and incorrectly implemented multi-threaded systems.

      Some of these problems can be laid at the feet of the implementation languages, but most of them are the fault of hasty, clumsy programming, regardless of language. Some can also be laid at the foot of the client/contractor interface: the client only has a vague idea of what they want, and the contractors are more interested in not antagonizing the client with too many questions than producing usable specs. Lets not even consider the problem of who to bill for properly maintaind developer documentation.

      The second big problem is weak interprocess communication...The basic problem is that what you usually want is a subroutine call, but what the OS gives you is an I/O operation.


      Weak inter-process communication isn't a problem, it's a feature! The best way to build reliable, maintainable systems is with loosely coupled processes that exchange data through simple file-like streams. Then, when something fails, you can remove the misbehaving part, without disrupting the rest of the system, and examine the intermediate files to diagnose the problem.

      In fact, one of the worst culprits in the modern software rogues gallery is the database, precisely because it strengthens the coupling between all parts of the system. Sophisticated IPC tools, that make IPC look just like a function call, result in brittle, opaque systems that can't be easily maintained or diagnosed.

      The third big problem is DMA... With channelized I/O, drivers aren't as privileged. They can only mess up their own peripheral, not the whole system.


      DMA and device drivers are only the concern of a very small fraction of programmers. Most of those programmers who do have to deal with such things, however, are well able to manage any of the resulting complexities.

      I/O channels are nice, I admit, but their lack is not a fatal flaw. Perfectly stable systems can be built on simple interrupt or DMA driven architectures.

      Fourth, Microsoft likes a complicated OS. Ballmer has said so publicly. If PCs came with channelized hardware and a microkernel in ROM, the OS would have far less to do, and would be more of a commodity. There'd be alternatives, like KDE and Gnome on Linux, all of which ran the same applications. Standardized interprogram communication, enforced by the kernel and hardware, would make components more pluggable. All this would dent the Microsoft monopoly severely.


      The lack of channelized hardware or an in-ROM micro-kernel is not why we don't have a comoditized OS on Intel PCs. In fact, we do have comoditized OS's: Linux, the BSDs, Solaris etc. are all adequate counter examples. However, Microsoft has managed to manipulate the market in order to marginalize any significant competition. The fault is entirely a political/economic one which cannot be addressed technologically.
    6. Re:Why software sucks by Alsee · · Score: 2

      Java and C# are not like C, they are maybe similar to C++, but not C.

      C++ is nothing like C. Chuckle.

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
    7. Re:Why software sucks by AVee · · Score: 1

      While this is partly true, i don't think it's the main problem. The things you mention make it harder to write a bug-less program, but in no way imposible. The same can be applied to thing like C# and Java, less effort is needed, but it's by no means impossible to write bad software. The programming language is just the tool, the program is the design + implementation. And design is the larger part here.
      Compare it to building say a treehouse, that will be easier given good tools, but is your design looks like flying carpet, you will never get a treehouse, no matter what tools you use. But is the design is allright you might even manage to build a treehouse with your bare hands...

    8. Re:Why software sucks by Junks+Jerzey · · Score: 2

      Fourth, Microsoft likes a complicated OS

      And so does everyone else. Linux and OS X are in the same complexity ballpark. You could argue that Linux is simpler than Windows, but that's like saying that a 747 is simpler than a 777.

      When you look at what people are doing on systems without operating systems--take a look at Grand Theft Auto 3 on the PlayStation 2--then it makes you wonder.

    9. Re:Why software sucks by Seekerofknowledge · · Score: 1

      If you have ever actually been involved with an engineering project, or with real design, you would simply not be bashing C. Without C, there would be absolutely zero technology in place. Just think, the computer you posted your message was running a C based kernel, and C based driver, and even the firmware in your monitor and keyboard, AND mouse, if not written in assembly was written in C. There is just no better language for writing anything complicated than C. C# and Java are by no means portable or even viable in any sort of embedded or critical application. A kernel based on, good Lord, C# or Java? That is unquestionable, unless you are prepared to have an extrememly large footprint and processing requirements (those VM's are bitches). Try to imagine your cell phone running a java based operating system. Or simply trying to even control hardware through C#. It won't work, will it? Somewhere there must be C.

      And so before bashing the language which simply is responsible for virtually all of the technology we have, realize that using a different language will not make software better. A good design will be good design, regardless of the language. A bad design may result in an average program, but will more than likely result in an extrememly bad program. Java, I don't know why you considered C++ on par with it,simply protects the programmer from him/herself. If the programmer/designer cannot be relied on to provide a good design, then they should not be employed.

  28. Tom Green by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    His polygamy and marriage to young girls I could tolerate. What he really should go to jail for is welfare fraud -- didn't he have several of his "wives" claiming to be unwed mothers and receiving assistance from the state?

  29. Radioactive Spark Plugs by BigBlockMopar · · Score: 1
    The polonium gives off alpha particles that help to discharge static from the negatives as you brush them. $10-$20.

    Polonium was also used on spark plugs for a while during the "atomic age". Neat idea, ionizing radiation lets you set the electrodes further apart. Found a picture of them here.

    Sounds plausible, but I'm not sure how well they'd work, nor am I sure how much polonium would end up reacting chemically during combustion and leaving the tailpipe as a dangerous radioactive compound, but I've seen them before and thought they were amusing.

    Better watch out or every homey with a V-Tec sticker on his Honda Civic will be trying to screw 1940s spark plugs into his head so he can have a "nuclear-powered" 4-cylinder wanna-be racecar.

    Heheh.

    --
    Fire and Meat. Yummy.
  30. Mathematica Envy by fm6 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Always wanted to play with Mathematica, never could afford it. Now I hear from a guy who uses it as an HTML editor! I think I'll have him killed.

    1. Re:Mathematica Envy by kuroth · · Score: 1

      I imagine Mathematica is pretty cheap compared to the tools he has on hand. He's got a small fortune in clamps alone.

    2. Re:Mathematica Envy by lingqi · · Score: 2, Funny

      I think I'll have him killed.

      send him some plutonium; that should do it ;-)

      --

      My life in the land of the rising sun.

  31. Wait a second by Pfhor · · Score: 2

    What is going to stop him from putting a "nuclear powered" sticker on his car in the first place?

    I mean, if the beaterz.com website taught us anything, it is stickers with cool names can compensate for lack of actual performance any day.

    1. Re:Wait a second by BigBlockMopar · · Score: 2

      What is going to stop him from putting a "nuclear powered" sticker on his car in the first place? I mean, if the beaterz.com website taught us anything, it is stickers with cool names can compensate for lack of actual performance any day.

      Oh my God, thank you, that site absolutely kicks ass. :)

      --
      Fire and Meat. Yummy.
    2. Re:Wait a second by ethereal · · Score: 1

      Or racing stripes. Here's a hint for the auto makers of America: a racing stripe all the way down the center of a pickup truck doesn't make it look any faster; it just makes the driver look like a knob.

      --

      Your right to not believe: Americans United for Separation of Church and

  32. Re:Some of the radioactives are readily available. by Dag+Maggot · · Score: 1

    In case anyone is wondering, "Fiestaware" is any ceramic dishes painted with a very Brady Bunchish orange paint. It turns out the paint contains a lot of uranium oxide, and is shows up quite well when a Geiger counter is put next to it.

    Here is a site describing FiestaWare with pictures of the Geigercounter resting on top of it.

    http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/nucle ar / ucbuy.html#c2

    --

    I have no pants and I must scream

  33. Re:Some of the radioactives are readily available. by GrEp · · Score: 2

    Did we say pitchblende? Only $750 USD and you can have a nice size chunk for yourself. Hmm. Wonder if you can make a good misquito lamp out of it...

    --

    bash-2.04$
    bash-2.04$yes "Don't you hate dialup connections?"| write USERNAME
  34. Re:hmmmm by bilbobuggins · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    don't buy IBuyPower computers. my disk died today and I had to use a Windoze box just to get my work done. AAAAAAAAAAAHHH!

  35. Re:Some of the radioactives are readily available. by drDugan · · Score: 2

    1 pack >= pa+lat chest??

    can someone give a reference on this?

  36. Inappropriate Abstraction Methods by Tom7 · · Score: 2

    I agree with you, and in general you can sum up your argument as follows: Software sucks because we use inappropriate abstraction mechanisms.

  37. Ah, ok, yeah. I think... by Wee · · Score: 2
    ...snip much semantic hoo-hah about drug-abusing felons not named "L. Ron" who started "churches" for dubious reasons...

    So it's basically a money thing, then?

    -B

    --

    Ash and Hickory, straight-grained and true, make excellent bludgeons, dandy for the cudgeling of vegetarians.

  38. Wind turbine towers? by Dyolf+Knip · · Score: 2

    Can someone explain to me how these things work? Are they similar to solar chimneys or what?

    --
    Dyolf Knip
    1. Re:Wind turbine towers? by g.a.g · · Score: 1

      No, they mean just the tower of the wind turbine. Usually these days, they are tubular (actually, slightly conical) steel towers, hollow on the inside, so that you can step up the ladder, circular staircase or elevator. (Try climbing a 60m ladder three or four times in a day, as the maintenance guys do - keeps one fit!)
      These tubular steel towers reach heights of about 100 m (99m is the highest I've seen so far, on the DEWI test field).
      In the olden days, lattice towers were used quite frequently (see all the old machine forests eg on San Gorgognio or Altamont passes). Nowadays, the nicer aesthetics plus the possibility to put the electrical gear inside has nearly completely replaced them. However, for getting significantly higher than 100m, they might be much more cost-effective (I've seen one 114m lattice tower wedged in a forest - yes, it's a stupid idea).

      Plug of the day: If you're really interested in wind energy, try windpower.dk. This will tell you everything you wanted to know, and then some.

      --
      Hurricane Application Group, Dept of Meteorology Control, Ministry of Proactive Defense
  39. George Lazenby contributes elements? by zodar · · Score: 1

    As 007, I guess he would have access to things like Thallium.

  40. Re:pretty white buildings you see from the freeway by airdrummer · · Score: 1

    ya gotta hand it 2 those wacky mormons: they sure know how 2 impress w/architecture...but isn't that the purpose of all steeples;-)

    here in Our Nation's Capital(tm dave barry;-) they bought some land near where the beltway was going 2 b built (and ya gotta admire their long-term planning;-) so now travelers on the outer loop(counterclockwise, west-bound) cresting the rise @ the georgia ave. exit are treated to the angel moroni rising atop the main spire, appearing on the western horizon like a vision (as i'm sure he did 4 ol joe smith;-) and dominating the view for the entire 1 mile downhill stretch, until it disappears behind the CSX rr bridge over the beltway, where u can still make out the over-painted graffiti: "surrender dorothy"
    hey, anybody up 4 slipping some green gels over the temple's floodlites?;-);-);-)

  41. Re:Off-topic curiosity[golden plates] by airdrummer · · Score: 1

    no,no, after the plates were translated by joe, with the aid of the urim & thummim (xref: seeing stones/indian gold;-) the angel moroni conveniently reappeared & took them back...what? u expected hard evidence? religions don't need no steeking evidence;-)

  42. Re:full experience of driving a car of that era by airdrummer · · Score: 2, Funny

    yup, u rilly can't appreciate a modern car til u've experienced the thrill of mechanical brakes...i made sure my daughter drove my dad's '35 ford phaeton...she now appreciates power steering, as well;-)

  43. Shoulda said US Amps builds their OWN tube amps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    sound phenomenal, again, and use almost no power at sound levels high enough to shake your mirror off the windshield

  44. Re:Some of the radioactives are readily available. by Dr.+Zowie · · Score: 2

    Yep -- though there's new, non-radioactive fiestaware (apparently it's still a viable brand!) available in a department store near you. I forget which chain I saw it in -- maybe Macy's...

  45. Your 7.4L Dodge, VS. My 2.3L SLK... by Ferox · · Score: 0

    I would waste you so fast, it would be almost a waste of my time. Not only could I beat you in the 1/4 mile, I could beat you in the turns, and in endurance. Just because you have a bigger engine, doesnt mean you are better in any way.

    So, while you are still driving your pentacle of inefficiency, I will be near the finish line, WINNING!

    --
    I drive WAY too fast to worry about cholesterol!
    1. Re:Your 7.4L Dodge, VS. My 2.3L SLK... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mispelled "pinnacle".

      HTH HAND

    2. Re:Your 7.4L Dodge, VS. My 2.3L SLK... by BigBlockMopar · · Score: 2

      I would waste you so fast, it would be almost a waste of my time. Not only could I beat you in the 1/4 mile, I could beat you in the turns, and in endurance. Just because you have a bigger engine, doesnt mean you are better in any way.

      Your MacPherson struts make up for my handicap of a longer wheelbase and greater mass. You probably wouldn't outhandle and outsteer me as well as you think you would. Note that I'll take the bale of hay or the crushed Honda Accord out of the back before the event.

      Four wheel disk brakes might be your advantage. Even if they're tiny and cute and motorcycle-sized. You might want to check www.rockauto.com, look up my truck, and see what my brakes are like. My rear drums are on the 9.25" axle. You should be able to look up my drum diameter and width from that. Unloaded, with modern tires, the truck stops quickly. I've driven a variety of performance cars (and I don't define a Honda Civic with tinted windows as a performance car). It doesn't stop as quickly as those, but it's *quite* respectable.

      Rear-wheel-drive is my advantage. Ask yourself why legitimate performance cars of any era are universally rear-wheel-drive.

      Displacement doesn't matter? Given that power is created by burning gasoline in air, and that the amount of gasoline you can burn stoichiometically is limited by how much air you can get into the motor, I'd think that increasing the displacement would be one of the most effective ways of increasing the power of an internal combustion engine. Maybe the laws of physics and chemistry apply differently wherever you are.

      So, while you are still driving your pentacle of inefficiency, I will be near the finish line, WINNING!

      Uh-huh.

      Stoplight to stoplight confrontations are essentially what? Drag racing.

      What do they drive on TNN's NHRA coverage? 4-cylinder front-wheel-drive smegmamobiles or large-displacement rear-wheel-drive long-wheelbase railcars? Hmmm... More like my truck than your car, isn't it?

      The astute will even watch NHRA Today looking for those large V8s where the spark plug leads go through the valve covers. That's the legendary Chrysler Hemi. The Hemi and my 440 are rather close relatives, sharing most of the same geometries and many parts.

      Your 2.3L motor probably shares most of its geometry with a minivan.

      --
      Fire and Meat. Yummy.
  46. Re:In short... or not. by ctimes2 · · Score: 1

    Seriously, the anon-coward's right. For a die-hard atheist you know more about the history of Christian religions in general and Mormons specifically than the white-shirts. What gives? (I'm suspecting a disgruntled Utah native, perhaps the bishops' son or daughter?).

    I'm not disagreeing with you, but I live in Utah and you seem to be giving the mo-mo's (yet another euphemism for a Mormon) an unfair shake. Most of the ones I've met are pretty good people. For every one that's so wrapped up in their jammies they seem to have lost all reason (if not oxygen) there are 20 who are nice, mostly normal and intelligent (as you can see by the BYU story, the Mecca of college bound Mormons).

    And I'm agnostic if you were tempted to brand me as a Mormon apologist...

    --
    My cube. My friend. My solace. My prison.
  47. Re:In short... or not. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Um, not sure that I read ANYWHERE in his diatribe that he was saying they were bad people, just clarifying the history.

  48. Re:Some of the radioactives are readily available. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This page seems to be mostly factual and will give you some numbers on this.

    Of course there is some question about which parts of the body are more or less sensitive to radiation, and in my opinion 1,300 mrem/year is not as much of a risk as the chemical effects of the cigarette smoke. Still, 1,300 mrem/year is considerably greater than what the DOE allows nuclear sites to expose the general public to.

    In terms of life expectancy the effect of smoking has been well estimated for a while. This is what life insurance companies are good at. It is interesting to see that radiation could be part of how smoking effects people. But as I said, I personally suspect the radiation is not significant enough to be a large factor.

  49. Web authoring in Mathematica? by alouts · · Score: 1
    Am I the only one who noticed that on the front page of his periodic table description, Theo Gray mentions he generates all his web pages using Mathematica??

    Now, I know it's a cool software package and all, but doesn't that fall into the category of functional bloat? When did it go from a math package to a web page authoring tool? Am I missing something obvious here?

  50. When you've been developing it for 15 years by ynotds · · Score: 2

    I don't expect it is too hard to get it to do whatever you want it to do.

    Theo has been a key member of the Mathematica development team since day one.

    Early on he was looking at defining its graphical user interface using Mathematica itself, and it isn't all that far from GUI to Web site and book design.

    --
    -- Our systemic servants do not good masters make.
  51. Re:Off-topic curiosity[golden plates] by Aewin · · Score: 1

    but we have evidence, we have witness, all those who watched the plates befores taken back by moroni, and which names apear in every book of mormon in the earth, but wait many of them left the church, but why?, they saw the evidence, why a person who watch so much evidence from joseph smith will leave his church, maybe because its scam????

  52. Re:In short... or not. by An+Onerous+Coward · · Score: 1
    "I'm suspecting a disgruntled Utah native, perhaps the bishops' son or daughter?).
    Disgruntled? Check. Utah native? Check. Bishop's kid? Scoutmaster's kid, actually. :)

    I would never say that Mormons are fundamentally bad people. Too much firsthand experience to the contrary.
    --

    You want the truthiness? You can't handle the truthiness!

  53. Stop smoking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Power goes up approximately linearly with area, but tripling the blade length will only triple the area of the blade, since the blade is approximately a rectangle, not the circle described by the blade's motion.