Slashdot Mirror
Another English/Metric "Spacecraft" Problem
SuperDry writes "There's been another spacecraft failure that's been attributed to an English/Metric units problem, this time at Tokyo Disneyland's Space Mountain. An axle broke on a "spacecraft" (a.k.a. roller coaster train) mid-ride, causing it to derail (nobody was hurt). The final investigation report has been released, and the root cause has been determined to be a part being the wrong size due to a conversion of the master plans in 1995 from English units to Metric units. In 2002, new axles were mistakenly ordered using the pre-1995 English specifications instead of the current Metric specifications. Apparently size does matter, even if it's only a 0.86mm difference."
Yet another case of corporations maiming and killing people.
I like to use the "rod" unit.
Although, 1/20th rod does sound kind of small.
I could care less, but not without a lobotomy
India attacks US on plan to ban outsourcing
India attacks US on plan to ban outsourcing
By Khozem Merchant in Mumbai
Published: January 25 2004 19:11 | Last Updated: January 25 2004 19:11
India's technology industry has attacked proposed new US legislation that bans the outsourcing of federal work to low cost countries arguing it is a protectionist measure contrary to the spirit of free trade.
The move by the US Senate coincides with decisions by a number of foreign companies to halt further outsourcing to India because of a new domestic tax ruling that would enable the Indian government to tax part of their worldwide earnings.
The US bill, which was passed by the Senate of Friday but has still to be signed by President George W. Bush before it becomes law, is the most significant attempt to stop outsourcing, a fast-growing industry trend that has led to the loss of thousands of highly-paid technology jobs in the US and become a hot political issue in a US election year.
Although US federal contracts account for only 2 per cent of India's IT earnings, the bill sends a worrying message to the Indian outsourcing industry, which has been lobbying hard to stave off protectionism.
Arun Shourie, Indian's information technology minister, said the bill damaged the outlook for talks on freer multilateral trade. Kiran Karnik, president of Nasscom, the umbrella body for Indian IT, said he "hoped wiser counsel would prevail" before the law was enacted.
The revenues from India's technology industry are forecast to expand by a third to $15.5bn in the year to March, with two-thirds of the growth coming from the US, as more companies in North America and elsewhere leverage India's high IT skills and low costs.
But US companies such as JP Morgan and General Electric, which have outsourced thousands of jobs to India, could be casualties of the controversial rule on the taxable status of foreign companies' outsourced units. This week Nasscom said three unidentified foreign companies with back office operations in India had frozen future outsourcing until "there was clarity".
The government circular, which is binding on the tax-collecting authorities, says a foreign company's global income would be taxable under India's double-tax treaties if that company's outsourced unit in India carries out "core revenue-generating activities." Non-core activities conducted at arm's length and at fair market value would be exempt.
Accountants say the ruling introduces artificial distinctions between core and non-core work. "This raises technical ambiguities that could lead to litigation," said one tax expert.
Experts say an accepted principle of global accounting norms is that double-tax treaties override domestic tax regulations. Foreign companies could therefore appeal to double tax pacts, which prevent the imposition of taxes from different countries on the same business, to circumvent the circular.
Nasscom has protested to the Indian government, arguing the measure is contrary to the government's tax-friendly stance towards a nascent, job-creating industry.
Film records effects of eating only McDonald's for a month.
... It was amazing - and really frightening." And his girlfriend, a vegan chef? "She was completely disgusted by me," he said.
Film records effects of eating only McDonald's for a month
25.01.2004 12.00pm - By DAVID USBORNE
NEW YORK - Normally sane actors have been known to gain or lose huge amounts of weight for their art. Think of Renee Zellweger in Bridget Jones's Diary. Directors, of course, never have to undergo such torture. Or so it used to be, until Morgan Spurlock had a bright idea for a film project.
The first clue to his particular misery comes in the title of his documentary, which has become the darling of this year's Sundance Film Festival. It is called Super Size Me: A Film of Epic Portions and it is a sometimes comic but serious look at America's addiction to fast food.
Spurlock, a tall New Yorker of usually cast-iron constitution, made himself the guinea pig in this dogged investigation into the effects of fast food on the body. He ate only at McDonald's for a month - three meals, every day - and took a camera crew along to record it. If a server offered to super-size his order, he was obliged to accept - and to ingest everything, gherkins and all.
Neither Spurlock, 33, nor the three doctors who agreed to monitor his health during the experiment were prepared for the degree of ruin it would wreak on his body. Within days, he was vomiting up his burgers and battling with headaches and depression. And his sex drive vanished.
When Spurlock had finished, his liver, overwhelmed by saturated fats, had virtually turned to pate. "The liver test was the most shocking thing," said Dr Daryl Isaacs, who joined the team to watch over him. "It became very, very abnormal."
Spurlock put on nearly 12kg over the period and his cholesterol level leapt from a respectable 165 to 230. He told the New York Post: "I got desperately ill. My face was splotchy and I had this huge gut, which I've never had in my life
Making the film over several months last year, Spurlock travelled through 20 states, interviewing everyone from fast-food junkies to the US Surgeon General and a lobbyist for the industry. McDonald's, for whom the film can only be a public relations catastrophe, ignored his repeated entreaties for comment.
Spurlock had the idea for the film on Thanksgiving Day 2002, slumped on his mother's couch after eating far too much. He saw a news item about two teenage girls in New York suing McDonald's for making them obese. The company responded by saying their food was nutritious and good for people. Is that so, he wondered? To find out, he committed himself to his 30 days of Big Mac bingeing.
The film does not yet have a distributor and, given the advertising clout of McDonald's, that may prove problematic. But the critics at Sundance seem to have been captivated. Certainly, the film is blessed by good timing. Obesity has in recent months captured headlines as America's new health scourge. The humour of the approach - and Spurlock's own suffering - obviously helps.
At the festival in Park City, Utah, he has had teams handing out "Unhappy Meal" bags on the streets with a few "Fat Fun Facts". For instance, one in four Americans visits a fast-food restaurant every day. And did you know that McDonald's feeds more people around the world every day than the population of Spain? The makers have self-rated the film "F" - for "fat audiences".
McDonald's has finally been forced to comment. "Consumers can achieve balance in their daily dining decisions by choosing from our array of quality offerings and range of portion sizes to meet their taste and nutrition goals," it said in a statement last week.
Spurlock claims that the goal was not to attack McDonald's as such. Among t
In your case it's too much.
---
imagine an imaginary menagerie manager imagining managing an imaginary menagerie...