Slashdot Mirror


City Officials Almost Ban Foam Cups

localhost00 writes "The city of Aliso Viejo, CA nearly banned foam cups when they learned they are produced from a substance known as 'dihydrogen monoxide.' A paralegal working for the city apparantly found a professionally designed web site put up to describe the dangerous properties of this chemical. Apparantly, the report about Dihydrogen Monoxide was written by a then 14-year-old Nathan Zohner who was researching the gullibility of fifty ninth graders."

1,055 comments

  1. Come on CA by nberardi · · Score: 3, Funny

    Tricked by a 14 year old, what is the government in CA comming too.

    1. Re:Come on CA by jtwJGuevara · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Apparantly, the report about Dihydrogen Monoxide was written by a then 14-year-old Nathan Zohner who was researching the gullibility of fifty ninth graders.

      Nice, law making officials have been put on the same level of discerning information as a class of high school freshman. This gives me great confidence in our legaslative bodies.

    2. Re:Come on CA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "cleaning house"
      -Governator

    3. Re:Come on CA by falcon5768 · · Score: 3, Funny

      well hey dont yell at us!!! I mean really who would want to live in a state that has mudslides, Earthquakes, and fires ON A GOOD YEAR

      --

      "Slashdot, where telling the truth is overrated but lying is insightful."

    4. Re:Come on CA by mattlary · · Score: 5, Funny

      From the state who wants to ban the use of "Master" and "Slave" in hard drive designations... God I hate California

    5. Re:Come on CA by smittyoneeach · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Pretty easy to take potshots at elected officials. In cases like this one, they're well deserved. However, I submit that expecting perfect decision-making 100% of the time from leaders is akin to expecting coders to write non-trivial code that works perfectly on first execution.
      Which is not a blank check to politicians, letting them go out and debug their way to a reasonable course of action.
      Ultimately, if we're that pissed off about stuff, we have to get involved, whereupon we'll see some of the complexities involved.

      --
      Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
    6. Re:Come on CA by WyerByter · · Score: 2, Funny

      I guess that's why CA wants to let 14 year olds vote.

      --

      This signiture copied from somewhere.
    7. Re:Come on CA by cybermace5 · · Score: 5, Funny

      You'll find that when they ban water and legalize marijuana, they're actually on crack.

      --
      ...
    8. Re:Come on CA by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 3, Funny

      It's hell, living behind the Tofu Curtain. It's even tougher being the laughingstock of the nation. It's a good thing that we have Hollywood...the rest of the world actually *wants* to be like us.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    9. Re:Come on CA by Trepidati0n · · Score: 1

      Don't worry; Arnold will come along and "terminate" that law if it ever passed.

    10. Re:Come on CA by mdielmann · · Score: 4, Funny

      You're pretty optimistic. The article on snopes says one of the ninth-graders recognized it as water. Apparently, none of the officials did, otherwise it would have been stopped before they made complete asses of themselves.

      I, OTOH, had my faith (or lack thereof) in bureaucrats confirmed.

      --
      Sure I'm paranoid, but am I paranoid enough?
    11. Re:Come on CA by aborchers · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It was an unelected paralegal doing the research who fell for the DHMO joke. Did you consider that along the way, someone (quite possibly an elected official) spotted the bad research and stopped the monkey business?

      --
      Trouble making decisions? Just flip for it.
    12. Re:Come on CA by GMC-jimmy · · Score: 4, Interesting
      I submit that expecting perfect decision-making 100% of the time from leaders is akin to expecting coders to write non-trivial code that works perfectly on first execution.

      I'm not worried about honest mistakes, but unhonest exploitation of the gullible does worry me. Legal professionals (the wealthy ones) understand all too well how to exaggerate the truth and worse, how to sugar-coat a lie.

      Honest mistakes are forgivable. But, exaggeration on the other hand, well I'm not so sure about that.
      --
      __________________________________
      Free your mind - Flush your toilet
    13. Re:Come on CA by nomadic · · Score: 2

      Pretty easy to take potshots at elected officials. In cases like this one, they're well deserved.

      I wouldn't be too harsh on them. I haven't done chemistry since high school (well, did a little in bio in college), and while I consider myself reasonably well-grounded I don't remember all the details of chemical nomenclature.

    14. Re:Come on CA by hedge_death_shootout · · Score: 5, Funny

      Honest mistakes are forgivable. But, exaggeration on the other hand, well I'm not so sure about that.

      In fact, exaggeration is utterly unforgivable in all circumstances.

    15. Re:Come on CA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Why? Marijuana is safer than water. You can fatally overdose on water, unlike marijuana.

    16. Re:Come on CA by clambake · · Score: 3, Funny

      Nice, law making officials have been put on the same level of discerning information as a class of high school freshman. This gives me great confidence in our legaslative bodies.

      I KNOW! Isn't it great!?! I never in my life expected them to be as on the ball as high school kids.

    17. Re:Come on CA by troc · · Score: 4, Funny

      Look, I've told you a million times, don't exaggerate

      Troc.

      --
      Troc's dubious podcast and blog: http://www.trocnet.net
    18. Re:Come on CA by SoSueMe · · Score: 1

      I agree, but H2O? C'mon!

    19. Re:Come on CA by robertjw · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Yeah, and my first thought is that they were going to vote something a paralegal brought to them into law without checking it out???? I think that's an even worse reflection on these public officials.

    20. Re:Come on CA by TheLink · · Score: 1

      "well hey don't yell at us"

      Umm, ever considered that maybe God is giving you all a hint? :)

      --
    21. Re:Come on CA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      the rest of the world actually *wants* to be like us.


      Not for long, more and more production is being done outside of california... It's just too darn expensive there!
    22. Re:Come on CA by bluprint · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The problem is that politicians see themselves as capable of correctly legislating everything (proof: They legislate things all the time they can't possibly be educated about). I also see this as proof that politicians aren't generally interested in truth, but rather are more interested in looking important/effective.

      And for the record, even though I did very well in high school and college chemistry, I missed the "dihydrogen monoxide" reference at first. However, I never presumed to be knowledgable enough to actually make a policy creating decision on the matter either...they did.

      --
      A modern day witchhunt.
    23. Re:Come on CA by moviepig.com · · Score: 2
      I hate to defend politicians and bureaucrats, and I don't know that it's called for here, but...

      In essence, this is just a practical joke that went way up the ladder. Concern for safety should have been the first reaction, and maybe even the second.

      E.g., when told that her baby shows signs of 'ingestive salivary discharge', how many new mothers will complacently reach for a napkin?

      --
      Seeing bad movies only encourages them. Watch responsibly
    24. Re:Come on CA by Entropius · · Score: 1, Interesting

      You can fatally overdose on marijuana, too.

      Don't believe me? Well, I've got this wheelbarrow of plants for you to eat...

    25. Re:Come on CA by glyph42 · · Score: 2, Funny

      You should never generalize.

      --
      Music speeds up when you yawn, but does not change pitch.
    26. Re:Come on CA by Ryosen · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Actually, in just about any law firm, it's the paralegal who is responsible for the research. Paralegals are the unsung heros of the legal profession, doing all of the work and getting none of the credit. The basic difference between a (good) paralegal and an attorney is a couple years of school (although some go up through getting their Masters degree), a bar exam, and paralegals don't litigate in court.

      --

      Ryosen
      One man's "Troll, +1" is another man's "Insightful, +1".
    27. Re:Come on CA by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
      Well, you should have some basic knowledge of speaking English if you are native to the US. Yes, even though I'm speaking of the US version...these words 'ingestive salivary discharge' mean the same whether here or another English speaking country. Its a shame that in the US, our vocabulary has dropped so far...

      I've stumped people a number of times while asking for a 'negative atmosphere liquid transport device'....then, I just point at the straw.....

      :-)

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    28. Re:Come on CA by aborchers · · Score: 1

      Again, it's easy to mock the officials, but the part of the story I haven't heard yet is who did check it out? Someone stopped the thing from coming to a vote!

      --
      Trouble making decisions? Just flip for it.
    29. Re:Come on CA by mwood · · Score: 1

      No, you Californiacs can keep Hollywood and all its works. I just want to pick up Indiana as-is and move it to a warmer latitude.

    30. Re:Come on CA by bigpat · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "However, I submit that expecting perfect decision-making 100% of the time from leaders is akin to expecting coders to write non-trivial code that works perfectly on first execution."

      If people are writing code that has similar effects to laws, ie people go to jail or get executed, get money taken from them by force in the form of fines, or otherwise effect people's lives in a nonvoluntary way, then they better damn well get it right on first execution after its release.

    31. Re:Come on CA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1
      Funny? Try Insightful. No researcher has ever been able to fatally overdose an animal on THC (the drug in marijuana), and believe me they have tried! This is one of the many gaping holes in drug war logic.

      People have died of water overdose, sadly. It has something to do with electrolytes and the heart I think.

    32. Re:Come on CA by GMC-jimmy · · Score: 3, Interesting
      It was an unelected paralegal doing the research who fell for the DHMO joke. Did you consider that along the way, someone (quite possibly an elected official) spotted the bad research and stopped the monkey business?

      Did you consider that the paralegal could've been the patsy to save face for the elected official ?
      --
      __________________________________
      Free your mind - Flush your toilet
    33. Re:Come on CA by The+Only+Druid · · Score: 4, Informative

      Its never happened, as far as the medical lit. I know about is concerned. It has a self-limiting factor: you'll get so high that you'll pass out or be unable to move well before you're able to consume enough THC to cause any sort of fatal overdose effect (excluding, of course, asphixiating because you pass out on your face or something along those lines).

      --
      "Stumble before you crawl"
    34. Re:Come on CA by queenb**ch · · Score: 2, Funny

      So the high school kid is smarter than our elected officials.....

      I've always suspected this but now we have PROOF!

      --
      HDGary secures my bank :/
    35. Re:Come on CA by operagost · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Well, if you're going to make decisions regarding public health, you need to either know what the hell you're doing or hire a consultant who does.

      Obviously, not a single biochemist was consulted before deciding to bring this issue to a vote. Shoot, they could have just asked a high school chem teacher. And they've proved to be too damn stubborn to drop the whole issue, as the city manager came up with this whopper:

      "If you get Styrofoam into the water and it breaks apart, it's virtually impossible to clean up," Norman said.
      The irony is, it's SUPPOSED to break up in water!
      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    36. Re:Come on CA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      History records one fatality attributable to marijuana.

      The unlucky fellow was unloading bales from a truck, when the whole lot came crashing down on him.

    37. Re:Come on CA by CristalShandaLear · · Score: 1
      E.g., when told that her baby shows signs of 'ingestive salivary discharge', how many new mothers will complacently reach for a napkin?

      All of them. Mothers are sharper than you think, regardless of your limited view. Go call yours and apologize. *back on topic* I think the politicians are idiots. A quick online search these days can clear up so many things. They don't have time for this?

    38. Re:Come on CA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No, this should be a cautionary tale in so many ways:

      1. Just because it's on the Internet does not make it an authoritative source. I find the Internet to be a large shallow source, good for getting a direction and possible further sources for research, but not a replacement for libraries, technical journals/publications and a thousand other, more traditional, knowledge resources.
      2. In the words of Mark Twain, "common sense isn't!"
      3. Intelligence is not a prime prerequisite for paralegals or politicians.

      Pretty easy to take potshots at elected officials...

      Politicians make it soooo easy to take potshots at them! If they don't like being shot at, maybe they should quit painting targets on themselves. In other words, if they don't like being called stupid, they should stop doing stupid things!

    39. Re:Come on CA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Why? Marijuana is safer than water. You can fatally overdose on water, unlike marijuana.

      That's because everyone who tries to overdose on marijuana gives up before the project is done, because it seems like too much work and it is too complicated. If they don't first run out of money or crash into a tree while trying to get more.

    40. Re:Come on CA by lp-habu · · Score: 5, Insightful
      However, I submit that expecting perfect decision-making 100% of the time from leaders is akin to expecting coders to write non-trivial code that works perfectly on first execution.
      Good analogy. There is, however, a major difference: whcn a coder writes code with bugs, the bugs eventually get fixed. When legislators make laws, the bugs are almost never corrected. That is the greatest argument for requiring a hard expiration date on all laws.
    41. Re:Come on CA by thelasttemptation · · Score: 2, Informative

      The irony is, it's SUPPOSED to break up in water!

      It must suck to drink anything out of the brand you use. Quick, before it breaks apart, drink up!

      And I'm quite sure that Styrofoam isn't ment to break apart in water...

    42. Re:Come on CA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I bet I could make you choke on pot you stupid hippy.

    43. Re:Come on CA by biglig2 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No-one is expecting them to know chemistry, they are expecting them to want more than a slick website as proof that a substance needs a ban.

      Otherwise you could just make a slick web page saying that Windows gives you cancer, and they'd ban it too!

      Hey, wait a minute....

      --
      ~~~~~ BigLig2? You mean there's another one of me?
    44. Re:Come on CA by aborchers · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Did you consider that the paralegal could've been the patsy to save face for the elected official ?


      Sure, but which is more likely: that a paralegal did the research for the council or that a councilmember took it upon him/herself to research fabrication methods for styrofoam cups? I'm as quick to slam a pol as anyone, but there's no use in slinging mud when it's not their fault, which was my point in the original post.

      --
      Trouble making decisions? Just flip for it.
    45. Re:Come on CA by palmpunk · · Score: 3, Informative

      My PDR from '86 or so, under Marinol, lists two cases of death from marijuana injestion. In unrelated events, these guys ate a lot of hash

    46. Re:Come on CA by forii · · Score: 3, Insightful

      However, I submit that expecting perfect decision-making 100% of the time from leaders is akin to expecting coders to write non-trivial code that works perfectly on first execution.

      Exactly the reason why government should be kept as small as possible. Just as a reasonable operating system doesn't give every user super-user access, we shouldn't entrust the people's freedoms and rights to the government.

    47. Re:Come on CA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your sig:
      "Slashdot, where saying something everyone hates turns you into a Troll even if it makes a point."

      How, in any way, is this different from any other sort of public forum for "discussion" or "debate?" Any sufficiently large group will attract dogmatic assholes. This is why political debate in our nation has been dead for decades.

    48. Re:Come on CA by jimsum · · Score: 1

      I know you were joking with the "crash into a tree" statement, but please cite the evidence that smoking marijuana significantly impairs the ability to drive. From what I've read, you can be more impaired by alcohol, even at a level below the legal limit, than you will by any amount of pot.

      Check out the evidence. In Australia they measured the blood of people that died in auto accidents. People with Marijuana in the blood were no more likely to be killed in auto accidents than sober drivers; but those with alcohol in the blood stream were 5 times more likely to die.

      I don't know why people are so worried about people driving while high. You are allowed to drive while impaired; the legal limit for alcohol isn't 0.00, and as MADD will tell you, even one drink impairs. Why is it so hard to accept that Marijuana impairment, at any level of consumption, might be less than the legal limit for alcohol impairment?

      --
      -- Pot is safer than Beer
    49. Re:Come on CA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "It's a good thing that we have Hollywood...the rest of the world actually *wants* to be like us"

      Sure dude... believe whatever makes you feel better.

    50. Re:Come on CA by AgentPhunk · · Score: 1
      [my mom]

      I've told you a million times: DON'T EXAGGERATE!

      [/my mom]

    51. Re:Come on CA by jimsum · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      It is much easier to choke someone with water, and choking on water is much more likely to cause death. Sorry, water is still more dangerous.

      --
      -- Pot is safer than Beer
    52. Re:Come on CA by Lacutis · · Score: 1

      So, what your saying is either no politicians are mothers, or your statement isn't always true?

    53. Re:Come on CA by The+Only+Druid · · Score: 2, Interesting

      But here's the question: were they categorizing this as an overdose or simply over-ingestion? I dont have PDR, so I'm honestly asking, but this is what I mean: an overdose would mean that the chemical involved (i.e. THC and the other carbinoids that cause the 'high') caused one or more organ failures (possibly including the brain), resulting in death. Overingestion, on the other hand, would cause organ failure (again, possibly including the brain) for reasons unrelated to the chemical properties of marijuana (think of how drinking enough water can literally make your hyperhydrocephalic, i.e. swell your brain until death, or how drinking enough milk can cause an allergic reaction to the lactose inducing seizures then death).

      --
      "Stumble before you crawl"
    54. Re:Come on CA by mattyrobinson69 · · Score: 1

      I dont care what any study says on that. ive smoked plenty of pot to know that i wouldn't be safe driving if i was high on it.

      hahahaha, heehehehehehe, hahaha, there's a tree, hee hee hee, CRASH!

      you get the idea.

      you ever hallucinated on the stuff? i have, and i nearly got run over because of it.

    55. Re:Come on CA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      There are cases where the medical examiner is lazy and/or incompetent, and thinks that because THC is in the blood, that it was the cause of death. Look a little closer and you will always find that the person was also using another drug at the same time, and it caused the death.

    56. Re:Come on CA by CmputrAce · · Score: 1

      As you can see by the several posts in reply to yous that exaggeration is utterly unforgiveable in all circumstances is probably a little exaggerated itself. Humor is almost always based on some exaggeration. Think about it. We enjoy humorous exaggeration. At least I do.

      I do agree, however, that exaggeration made just to "prove" a point or sway a decision is something that I personally see as intolerable.

    57. Re:Come on CA by bri_n33 · · Score: 1

      CA doesn't want 14 year olds to vote, CA Legislators (Democrats) want 14 year olds to vote. Go figure.

    58. Re:Come on CA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Well someone caught it before it went to vote.

    59. Re:Come on CA by dedalus2000 · · Score: 1
      Yeah but find me a coder who actually thinks that his/her nontrivial code will run correctly on the first execution. It's endemic to the belief system of politicians to think the poor decisions they are making are correct and without flaw. There's a reason they seem confident on camera, they have no clear concept of their own fallibility.

      --
      My keyboads not woking popely.
    60. Re:Come on CA by dbc001 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Hmmm... Maybe it would help if a few extra eyes checked over that legislation before it gets released? Any chance of getting pre-release legislation published on sourceforge? I have to admit that I like the idea of open-source legislation. Not sure how it would work though...

    61. Re:Come on CA by jargonCCNA · · Score: 2, Informative
      "Styrofoam" cups? No, of course not. Dow STYROFOAM SM, however, is completely different story. Unfortunately, my information source regarding all things Dow Chemical isn't currently available, so I can't tell you whether or not Styrofoam SM is designed to break down in water.

      They only really key difference here is that most people use the term "styrofoam" to describe any injected-molded foam product, whereas Styrofoam technically only refers the polystyrene-based insulation created by Dow Chemical, Inc.

      Nothing like arguing semantics on /. to incite a flame war.
      /me dons his flame-proof boxers
      --
      Matthew G P Coe
      http://mgpcoe.blogspot.com/
    62. Re:Come on CA by ThosLives · · Score: 1
      Yeah, well, I just realized that hydrogen hydroxide (also an ingredient in styrofoam and just about everything else) is also dangerous! Quick, write a website for that one too!

      --
      "There are a dozen opinions on a matter until you know the truth. Then there is only one." - CS Lewis (paraprhase)
    63. Re:Come on CA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dude, we're talking about marijuana, not nitrous oxide.

    64. Re:Come on CA by rocketsled · · Score: 1

      On the Internet nobody knows your a dog.

      Woof.

    65. Re:Come on CA by thelasttemptation · · Score: 1

      Well, the topic is about a city almost banning foam cups, so I would assume they are using it in a broad meaning of the word :P

      Now here's a question, how many products acutally use this "STYROFOAM SM"?

    66. Re:Come on CA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We've (non-CA folks) always said that California is the Mueslix of the USA... the land of fruits, flakes, and nuts.

      In their huge rush to be politically correct, they will stomp on every right that is defined in the Bill of Rights. Similarly, they will fall for anything that has any tenuous link to being politically correct.

    67. Re:Come on CA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      mudslides, Earthquakes, and fires
      That's only three of the four seasons. You forgot riot.

    68. Re:Come on CA by KarmaMB84 · · Score: 1

      So they didn't say how likely people are to have an accident and walk away when high on marijuana? Studies here on traffic stops for dangerous driving showed that a disproportionate number were high on marijuana, impaired by alcohol or both. Different geographic areas and/or countries will show different results.

      I know people that *weren't even aware they were driving like a total idiot* while impaired by marijuana. If you've read the side affects of the stuff, you'd know that there's no way in hell someone *couldn't* be impaired. The fact is, the person that is impaired may not even be aware he's impaired just like a drunk isn't aware he can't drive. I know people that think they drive better drunk. That tells you how much you can trust someone who is impaired to give an objective opinion on their ability to drive.

    69. Re:Come on CA by Sepper · · Score: 4, Funny

      From the /usr/games/fortune database:

      "Oxygen is a very toxic gas and an extreme fire hazard. It is fatal in
      concentrations of as little as 0.000001 p.p.m. Humans exposed to the
      oxygen concentrations die within a few minutes. Symptoms resemble very
      much those of cyanide poisoning (blue face, etc.). In higher
      concentrations, e.g. 20%, the toxic effect is somewhat delayed and it
      takes about 2.5 billion inhalations before death takes place. The reason
      for the delay is the difference in the mechanism of the toxic effect of
      oxygen in 20% concentration. It apparently contributes to a complex
      process called aging, of which very little is known, except that it is
      always fatal.

      However, the main disadvantage of the 20% oxygen concentration is in the
      fact it is habit forming. The first inhalation (occurring at birth) is
      sufficient to make oxygen addiction permanent. After that, any
      considerable decrease in the daily oxygen doses results in death with
      symptoms resembling those of cyanide poisoning.

      Oxygen is an extreme fire hazard. All of the fires that were reported in
      the continental U.S. for the period of the past 25 years were found to be
      due to the presence of this gas in the atmosphere surrounding the buildings
      in question.

      Oxygen is especially dangerous because it is odorless, colorless and
      tasteless, so that its presence can not be readily detected until it is
      too late.
      -- Chemical & Engineering News February 6, 1956"

      --
      I live in Soviet Canuckistan you insensitive clod!
    70. Re:Come on CA by bitflip · · Score: 1

      I concur, but will continue trying, anyway. ;-)

    71. Re:Come on CA by STrinity · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It's not just politicians. On their series Bullshit, Penn and Teller sent a petition to ban DHMO to a Greenpeace rally. The only thing more disturbing than the people who were willing to sign after hearing selected facts about water, was the number of people who signed without even hearing the pitch.

      --
      Les Miserables Volume 1 now up with my reading of
    72. Re:Come on CA by SillyNickName4me · · Score: 1

      Teah, like getting correct election results isn't hard enough already, lets introduce 1/2 and 1/4 votes ;P

    73. Re:Come on CA by mu-sly · · Score: 2, Funny

      If this constitutes a "slick" website, then I'm Jeffry Zeldman!

      No doctype, all upper case tags, badly aliased transparent gifs, font tags, a fucking hit counter, flashing animated gif menu bullets... not to mention that it looks like shit anyway!

    74. Re:Come on CA by Daetrin · · Score: 2, Funny

      Don't make such a big deal out of it, you don't want to come off as some kind of extremist. After all, all extremists should be drug out into the street and shot.

      --
      This Space Intentionally Left Blank
    75. Re:Come on CA by Tackhead · · Score: 1
      > Tricked by a 14 year old, what is the government in CA coming to?

      According to CA State Senator John Vasconcellos (D-Santa Clara) -- yes, Santa Clara, same county as got trolled -- 14- and 15-year olds should get 1/4 votes.

      No, I'm not making that up.

      (Link goes to OC Register editorial pointing out in many ways, precisely how moronic Sen. Vasconcellos' proposal is.)

      Tip the US on its left, and everything loose will land in the People's Republic of California, the land of fruits, nuts, and vegetables - because you are what you eat.

    76. Re:Come on CA by mrlpz · · Score: 2, Funny

      >Otherwise you could just make a slick web page >saying that Windows gives you cancer, and >they'd ban it too!

      You mean it doesn't ? You mean they haven't ?
      Oh, the humanity !

    77. Re:Come on CA by pz · · Score: 3, Interesting

      ... well before you're able to consume enough THC ...

      You're assuming consumption is by inhalation; by ingestion, especially in concentrated form (hashish or THC tablets), it is surely possible.

      Just as it is difficult to achieve alcohol poisoning when drinking normally because of the same self-limiting effects (although it is possible), it is also possible to chug a litre of pure ethanol and likely induce death.

      --

      Put my fist through my alarm clock with its ding-dong death inside my ear. - The Blackjacks.
    78. Re:Come on CA by sootman · · Score: 1

      PS: All extremists should be shot.

      --
      Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
    79. Re:Come on CA by irokitt · · Score: 1

      Err, that was not the state of California, that was the county of Los Angeles. And this is not the state of California either, it's the city of Aliso Viejo.

      --
      If my answers frighten you, stop asking scary questions.
    80. Re:Come on CA by fnkleroi · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Exageration, unforgivable?! Where is your appreciation for stories?

      Great exagerators:
      Mark Twain
      Hunter S. Thompson
      Homer

      To name 3 without thinking too hard. If you don't appreciate exageration you can throw away all of your library for that matter. What is fiction but an exageration?

      Why without Exageration and Lying there would be no Sci Fi! No Sci Fi! Good God /.ers! This person is an infidel obviously.

    81. Re:Come on CA by Tackhead · · Score: 1
      > The problem is that politicians see themselves as capable of correctly legislating everything (proof: They legislate things all the time they can't possibly be educated about). I also see this as proof that politicians aren't generally interested in truth, but rather are more interested in looking important/effective.

      And that is why - even after having been exposed for the drooling acephalitic fucknozzle he is (apologies to any acephalitic fucknozzles who suffer from excessive salivation) - the guy who got trolled stayed on message with "If you get Styrofoam into the water and it breaks apart, it's virtually impossible to clean up".

      Smell that? That's stupid. Five gallons of it, condensed and unsweetened. Even the next door's neighbor's dog isn't dim enough to sample the stuff.

      But your elected officials are. Because from the Government, and they're here to help.

    82. Re:Come on CA by nate1138 · · Score: 3, Funny

      California is the little kid who's parents never ever told him "no". Lex Luthor was right. Arizona Bay sounds like a dandy place to visit.

      --
      Where's my lobbyist? Right here.
    83. Re:Come on CA by krumms · · Score: 1

      That is the greatest argument for requiring a hard expiration date on all laws.

      Yeah, just look what it's doing for the lifetime of copyright in the US. The government is blatantly stealing from the public on behalf of corporations in that particular instance.

      I strongly doubt that refinement would be to the benefit of a supposedly free country. It just raises more opportunities for the public to get fucked over. More so.

    84. Re:Come on CA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're not smokin' it right then, dude.

    85. Re:Come on CA by kf6auf · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I disagree with your analogy that "expecting perfect decision-making 100% of the time from leaders is akin to expecting coders to write non-trivial code that works perfectly on first execution." IMO, expecting decent decisions from leaders is akin to expecting decent code in final products that go to market. I don't care if you code doesn't work the first time, it's just a draft. What I care about is the final product of both cases, and being educated enough to not waste ones time working on drafts of stupid things (sorry, I can't think of an analogy to coding here).

    86. Re:Come on CA by carn1fex · · Score: 0
      God what an alien nightmare california is this doesnt suprise me.. i just got back from my first trip ever out there on business. I work for NASA and wanted to call in some astrobiologists to figure out the fauna of LA. Coming from the east coast, my justifications for quarantine and dissection include: 1: Theres a chain of smoothie places that sell "grass" health shakes. As in they cut the grass right there and blend it. Its fucking grass. I point this out and the girl said "no its Special Healthy Grass".

      2: Due to some alien photosynthesis processing 'booths', the white females have darker skin than their latino counterparts.

      3: Didnt they try to ban "master" and "slave" as computer hardware terms? I think they are trying to newspeak these words from the dictum over there so no one will know they are enslaved by some sunscreen botox composite antichrist.

      Summary: If youre from the east coast, LA is like Worcester,MA/Newark,NJ/Arlington,VA with palm trees and grass drinking devil freaks. Beware.

      --

      ---------

      No matter how thin you slice it, its still baloney.

    87. Re:Come on CA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      which is why most civilized countries don't execute people

    88. Re:Come on CA by uberdave · · Score: 2, Funny

      Why would you point to a straw after asking for a thermos? :-)

    89. Re:Come on CA by henrygb · · Score: 2, Interesting

      More than one slick website. Looking up dihydrogen monoxide suggests that it widely recognized as a danger. Only Urban Legends and the Recreation > Humor > Science > Chemistry directory spoils the effect.

    90. Re:Come on CA by B3ryllium · · Score: 1

      This reeks of a need for a formal validation process with mathematical proofs. Of course, then the mathemeticians will rule the world. And that's a sad place to be.

    91. Re:Come on CA by VdG · · Score: 1

      To be quite honest I think that at least a basic knowledge of science ought to be expected. And this is very basic.
      I don't know which is worse: the ignorance of those involved or their lack of discrimination.

    92. Re:Come on CA by i+chose+quality · · Score: 1

      this is because every person reacts differently to pot. me and a lot of people i know have no problem with driving when high. i actually drive more safely and don't speed as much as when i'm sober.

      the reason, why noone wants to legalize driving under influence of psychedelic substances is, that there is no way of measuring the impact it has on a persons mind.

      i'm perfectly safe, while high, but i know enough people, that are not. i wouldn't even let them ride a bike... =)

      --
      the computer is online
      i am not at it
      what a waste of ressources
    93. Re:Come on CA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful
      That isn't true. It has been estimated that ridiculous amounts of pot (1 and a half metric tons) consumed in ridiculous amounts of time (15 minutes) would kill you, but these are just estimations. Scientists have already tried to kill lab animals by injecting and feeding with pure THC - it just doesn't work.

      When a drug like alcohol or heroin causes depression of the brain in critical areas (respiratory control), too much can cause death through shallow breathing. When a drug like speed or cocaine directly increases heart rate, too much can cause heart attacks and similar problems. Pot does not affect areas of the mind or body that are critical for life, which makes overdose impossible. You just get really really stoned, and possibly freaked out. You don't die from it though.

    94. Re:Come on CA by Trix606 · · Score: 1

      Not to mention who asked the paralegal to do the research in the first place. I'm sure they did not decide to look into this matter on a whim.

      --
      "Look out honey, 'cause I'm using technology" -- Search and Destroy -- Iggy Pop
    95. Re:Come on CA by Lazaru5 · · Score: 1

      So about the same as any legitimate grass roots based campaign against something huh?

      It doesn't have to _look_ slick to _be_ slick. This is the latter.

      --

      --
      My comments and opinions completely reflect those of anyone and anything I am remotely associated with.
    96. Re:Come on CA by lp-habu · · Score: 3, Insightful
      If all laws had a definite (and short term -- perhaps no more than five years) expiration date, the legislators would be so busy trying to repass existing laws that they wouldn't have time to inflict any additional mischief on us.

      I think all laws passed should have two mandatory features: a list of clearly defined goals with deadlines, and a maximum cost. If any deadline passed without the goal being met, or if the maximum cost had been exceeded at any deadline, the law would immediately terminate. It could of course be repassed, but again only with the list of goals and costs.

    97. Re:Come on CA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      The state that has a lot of products "known to cause birth defects" (read the back of a tube of glue or model paint sometime).

      You should look at warning labels on water heaters. Apparantly, they are known in the state of California to cause health problems and such. I guess it's a good thing I live in Washington.

    98. Re:Come on CA by theonetruekeebler · · Score: 1
      My legislator has actually drafted a bill here in Georgia on my behalf---SB597, to exempt motorcycles from paying tolls in Georgia. It turns out that legislators generally don't run off half-cocked passing everything that seems, superficially, to make sense. See, as innocuous as it seems, the DOT and the toll authority have a bond issued to maintain the toll roads, and if you require them to exempt certain vehicles from the toll, you may be using one law to force them to violate another. So there's a fair amount of due dilligence (sp) going on. According to the FA, the California city in question had tried to do due dilligance, but had hired a fuckup to do it. Fortunately, they caught it in time.

      In other words, debugging does go on, as does component testing, prior to final release. And BTW courts get to QA the hell out of lots and lots of laws to ensure full-system consistency.

      --
      This is not my sandwich.
    99. Re:Come on CA by iminplaya · · Score: 1

      This gives me great confidence in our legaslative bodies.

      What about the fools that vote for and re-elect them over and over?

      --
      What?
    100. Re:Come on CA by w42w42 · · Score: 1
      That is the greatest argument for requiring a hard expiration date on all laws.
      I've never even heard of or thought of this before, but this sounds like an AWESOME idea. I'm not sure that it should pertain to *all* laws, but definitely a large share of them.
    101. Re:Come on CA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >It's hell, living behind the Tofu Curtain.
      Nice try. If you were really from Ca, you'd know that Aliso Viejo is in Orange County, one of the most conservative counties in the U.S. Just pull up any CA election map and look for the blob of red down south. Much more Tax Cut than Tofu.

    102. Re:Come on CA by smittyoneeach · · Score: 1
      educated enough to not waste ones time working on drafts of stupid things (sorry, I can't think of an analogy to coding here).

      Apparently you've never been beat with teh st00p3d requirement. Operating under deadline, I showed the customer simple, implemented and tested stuff, and get a rudder order to go make it into something stupid.
      The customer thought in terms of paper, and thus demanded an interface where the view and the model were tragically confused. Wasn't on that project much longer.
      Point is, the law is the operating system of society, and it is subject to the same heuristic quirks as the code over which you slave. Not that I'm trying to let the sharks^H^H^H^H^H^Hpoliticians and lawyers off the hook; simply pointing out that Good Leadership is Not as Easy as it Looks.
      Or did I just imply the existence of some? :)
      --
      Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
    103. Re:Come on CA by tbone1 · · Score: 2, Funny
      We know that it is illegal for a state to secede from the union, but is it legal for a union to secede from a state?

      Yours sincerely,
      The Other Forty-Nine States

      --

      The Independent: Reverend Spooner Arrested in Friar Tuck Incident - ISIHAC, Historical Headlines
    104. Re:Come on CA by tbone1 · · Score: 1
      They aren't in Chicago, they're in California.

      Oh, you mean voting for them over and over in different elections.

      --

      The Independent: Reverend Spooner Arrested in Friar Tuck Incident - ISIHAC, Historical Headlines
    105. Re:Come on CA by iminplaya · · Score: 2, Interesting

      In other words, if they don't like being called stupid, they should stop doing stupid things!

      Yes, while they're distracting us with that "stupid thing", they're also expanded the death penalty to include people who put Linux on their X-Box.

      --
      What?
    106. Re:Come on CA by SubtleNuance · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      And to watch your fucking language.

    107. Re:Come on CA by zdislaw · · Score: 3, Insightful
      This isn't as much about lack of basic science knowledge as it is about close reading skills and the psychology behind accepting statements at face value when they come from sources you trust.

      I'm sure that, had a few people taken the time to really think about what they were reading they would get it. Dihydrogen Monoxide is the kind of word that people scan quickly without stopping. I'm fairly certain that those council members would know that H2O is water, and even taking a few minutes to really read what they just scanned, could determine that Dihydrogen Monoxide is H2O

      It's like that joke:
      A plane crashes on the US/Canada border and half the people fall to the ground in the US and half in Canada.
      Where do you bury the survivors?

      Giving an incorrect answer does not mean that you don't know international law, it means that you, like most people, assume the good faith of the questioner and don't pay attention to the details.

      But I could be wrong. I mean, if you guys say so, then you're probably right. And since millions of people bought their records, then surely I'm wrong and Hootie and the Blowfish don't suck.

      --
      bad sig...no donut.
    108. Re:Come on CA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Haven't seen very many academic pages, have you?

    109. Re:Come on CA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Politicians make it soooo easy to take potshots at them! If they don't like being shot at, maybe they should quit painting targets on themselves. In other words, if they don't like being called stupid, they should stop doing stupid things!

      Life's tough, Its tougher if your stupid!

    110. Re:Come on CA by wjames · · Score: 1

      Lets just hope that the Department of Homeland Secuirty doesnt find those pages, They might just "Nuke the Wales" for living in the stuff.

    111. Re:Come on CA by SubtleNuance · · Score: 1

      Your a laughing stock because you elected Schwarzenegger -- not because some ignorant clerk got scared/confused by some fancy-book-sounding-words.

      Do you think the rest of the country laughs at you because The Energy Industry (Enron et al) extorted the State, via a phony 'crisis' in order to get him elected -- and, as a thanks, he prompltly removed any chance they might have to pay you back?

      Oh, i forgot, this is a meme that is supposed to offer up Environmentalists as ignorant tools, not our favorite hero Capitalism. Lets keep our memetics and rhetoric straight. I shouldnt be confusing the "issues".

    112. Re:Come on CA by AbbyNormal · · Score: 0

      "God"

      I think He is banned there too.

      --
      Sig it.
    113. Re:Come on CA by Single+GNU+Theory · · Score: 1

      Have you ever noticed that when software is executed it starts and when people are executed they stop?

      --
      Little Debian: America's #1 Snack Distro!
    114. Re:Come on CA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      We enjoy humorous exaggeration. At least I do.

      Wow, you enjoy it yet apparently are very bad at recognizing it.

    115. Re:Come on CA by jayayeem · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I think this is the key question... who asked for the research. Notice (in the MSNBC article) the line

      "The measure has been pulled from the agenda, although Norman said the city may still eventually ban foam cups."

      So someone decided styrofoam cups were bad, went out looking for supporting evidence, and was unable analyze the data he found. Since this got as far as it did, it is clearly someone with the ear of a councilman.

      Who is pursuing this agenda, and what other causes are they pushing, possibly with equally flawed evidence

      --
      I metamoderate, therefore I am
    116. Re:Come on CA by Chewie · · Score: 1

      And so by this logic, we can see that it's not just one local outbreak of idiocy, it's a widespread epidemic. Ergo, "God, I hate California."

      Q.E.D.

      --
      49 20 68 61 76 65 20 74 6F 6F 20 6D 75 63 68 20 66 72 65 65 20 74 69 6D 65 2E
    117. Re:Come on CA by Kevin+Burtch · · Score: 1


      It's hell, living behind the Tofu Curtain. It's even tougher being the laughingstock of the nation.

      Not like Palm Beach County (Florida), the laughing-stock of the world.

      I'd guess the only reason such a big deal is being made out of this is because it is California "land of geeks and geniuses", rather than South Florida "land of people who can't even figure out how to vote" (where stuff like this happens all the time).

      Gawd how I miss San Jose.

      --
      - Preferences: Solaris 10 (servers), Ubuntu (desktops), Solaris 11 (personal servers) -
    118. Re:Come on CA by Feanturi · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I dont care what any study says on that. ive smoked plenty of pot to know that i wouldn't be safe driving if i was high on it.

      hahahaha, heehehehehehe, hahaha, there's a tree, hee hee hee, CRASH!

      you get the idea.


      Yes, I get the idea that you're probably one of the ones that shouldn't be smoking pot. You know, in about 18 years of smoking the stuff and being around people who do, I have never met ONE person that would behave like your described scenario. The dumb-ass giggly shtick, I always took that to be a hollywood fabrication. "Reefer Madness" and its influence springs to mind. But I guess some people just can't handle mind-altering substances.

      I recall hearing about a study that tested (in simulators) driving abilities of straight, stoned, and drunk people. Guess what? The stoners tended to be the more careful, better drivers. Part of that I think is that when you're high, you know you're high, you know you need to compensate for attention-span etc. When your piss-drunk, you tend to forget that you're drunk, and figure being a complete idiot is just normal behavior.

      I got 150 on an IQ test right after sucking down a huge bowl of weed. I would never have been able to do that while drunk.

    119. Re:Come on CA by el-spectre · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but the 300 days a year of beautiful weather are a stronger hint! :)

      --
      "Faith: Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel." - A.B.
    120. Re:Come on CA by MoneyT · · Score: 2

      You forgot #4, big words should require an explination.

      I actualy convinced my college public speaking class to sign a petition and join a campaign to band Dihydrogen Monoxide from all facilities on campus, and I used plenty of authorative citations including the World Health Org, Public Health Center, Maryland Medical (IIRC) and a few others. It was all 100% truthful, the only thing I didn't do was give the common name for DHMO, and no one bothered to ask. In all, you need to make sure you have big words clarified if you don't understand them.

      --
      T Money
      World Domination with a plastic spoon since 1984
    121. Re:Come on CA by An+Onerous+Coward · · Score: 1

      Quick poll: Is there anyone in the United States who doesn't believe that he or she is not from the laughingstock of the nation? Which of our fifty states is indeed the laughing stock of the nation?

      As a native Utahn, I vote for us.

      --

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

    122. Re:Come on CA by JimBobJoe · · Score: 1

      Maybe it would help if a few extra eyes checked over that legislation before it gets released?

      On a serious note, state legislatures usually have a professional, civil-service organization that make sure that legislation is clear, constitutional and perhaps most importantly, does not contradict other laws already enacted (in my Ohio it's the Legislative Services Commission that does all this.) They usually do good work, and are much better than legislators coming up with the legal code all by themselves.

      Cities often don't have the resources for such a body.

    123. Re:Come on CA by Hawk-ML · · Score: 1

      California: land of the shake 'n bake.

    124. Re:Come on CA by WaterTroll · · Score: 1

      And I'm quite sure that Styrofoam isn't ment to break apart in water...

      nowadays a lot of the Styrofoam-like material used for package peanuts is made from starch. it dissolves in water pretty quickly. i am assuming these were made to avoid CFCs.

    125. Re:Come on CA by JimBobJoe · · Score: 1

      My favorite law is that California doesn't allow people to own gerbils. That's right, they'll send you to jail for owning a gerbil.

      I was introduced to the Dead Jennedy's song "California uber alles" which talks about California politicians (specifically Jerry Brown, but it could apply to many of them) as hippie fascists. (Meditation is now law, those who do not meditate will be arrested.)

    126. Re:Come on CA by mattcolemanrules · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I'm not sure if this is what you are referring (reefering??) to but I have only come across one documented death by marijuana consumption. And it was not caused by toxic levels of THC. I read the article over a year ago so it's a bit hazy, but basically some guy had oodles of weed and found out the cops knew about him. So he ate it all.

      Apparently it was so much that he caused his stomach to burst. Therefor the death was marijuana related, however it was really just death by eating too much. The THC probably just made the whole death thing slightly more bearable, but it's not what killed him.

    127. Re:Come on CA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      More to reduce landfill waste, I think. It's possible to make foam plastic without CFCs.

      I'm not sure if it really achieves its goal, since people throw them out just the same as plastic ones, and stuff like that never degrades in a landfill (even food waste - not enough air, water and light in a tightly packed pile). And even if they did flush them down the toilet or something, the resultant nutrient in the waste stream might cause even more problems (algae at outflow sites, etc).

      99% of the packaging I see is completely unnecessary. Very few people or companies understand packaging, so they just throw a lot of ...foam... at the problem and hope some sticks. Doing it well and minimally is an art and a science.

    128. Re:Come on CA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ha! You think Utah is a laughingstock, you should check out Alabama. Even Neil Young made fun of us!

    129. Re:Come on CA by AshtangiMan · · Score: 1
      I doubt that THC in overingestion would cause damage to the brain. Possibly kidneys and liver, because they don't have special receptors to handle it, and must metabolize it anyway. But the human brain has receptors that are specific to canabanoids (like THC), check the MAPS site for the sources on this. This means that the brain has a built in system for processing THC. Unlike a drug like Cocain, which works by blocking the Dopamine receptors, causing a certain amount of damage.

    130. Re:Come on CA by vandemar · · Score: 3, Funny
      Exageration, unforgivable?! Where is your appreciation for stories?

      It all makes sense now. All that stuff from Bush and co. about WMDs was really their contribution to the magical world of storytelling. Tuly a labor of love. The rest of the world should be so fortunate to have literary geniuses such as them in power.

    131. Re:Come on CA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually sentences (to death) are executed, not people. But the people usually do stop, 'tis true. Then again so does most code in my experience.

    132. Re:Come on CA by AshtangiMan · · Score: 1
      Just because it is perhaps less intoxicating or impairing than alcohol does not mean that it should not be illegal to drive under the influence. Drive straight and sober. Arguments like yours provide fodder to the "see, these dopers think it's okay to use and drive, so we need to keep it illegal" argument.

      Smoking marijuana does impair motor ability, and the evidence that it does can be found any number of places. I would suggest that you start with MAPS and then move on to the Lyceum and the Vaults of Erowid.

    133. Re:Come on CA by AshtangiMan · · Score: 1
      This thread is full of half truths. It is not possible to test the blood or otherwise and determine if someone is actually "high" on pot. You can only say that they used it in the past 30 days. So these statistics are really hard to believe, and amount only to anti-drug propaganda. It should be illegal to drive while impared, and it is possible to test for imparement (ie, the physical DUI tests).

      Why should the government be allowed to restrict what I grow in my garden?

    134. Re:Come on CA by Bob+C.+Cock · · Score: 1

      Well us Northern Californians wouldn't fall for that. Even us northerners think So Cal is on a different planet sometimes...that said tho I did have to go back to some HS chemistry to think this one out before I got the joke :P

    135. Re:Come on CA by rat7307 · · Score: 1

      And they should ship all bigots back to where they came from!

      --
      Burma?
    136. Re:Come on CA by liquidsin · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Well, smoking one pack of cigarettes may not kill you, but if you extract the nicotine from it and inject it, you'd be dead in minutes. So it looks like we need to ban cigarettes.

      --
      do not read this line twice.
    137. Re:Come on CA by jimsum · · Score: 1

      I recommend that you read the report that the Canadian Senate did recently. It addresses the testing issue, among all the others.

      http://www.parl.gc.ca/common/Committee_SenRep.as p? Language=E&Parl=37&Ses=1&comm_id=85

      My recollection is that THC decays very rapidly; something like 95% is gone within 10 minutes. That means that it is quite likely that blood tests will always be required for pot.

      On the other hand, the by-products of THC in the body are fat soluble and can be detected for months afterwards. Alcohol, cocaine and heroin all decay faster, so they can't be detected more that a day or two after. We are used to thinking that testing positive for a drug means you're high; but that isn't necessarily true for pot.

      Now the difficulty of measuring pot makes the studies hard to interpret, and I could have gone into all this and more when I mentioned the study. But I have found that most people know nothing about the real effects of pot and aren't interested in learning.

      --
      -- Pot is safer than Beer
    138. Re:Come on CA by Eristone · · Score: 2, Funny

      They might just "Nuke the Wales" for living in the stuff

      Hmm. I think Prince Charles might get a little pissed if we nuke Wales, considering he's the Prince of Wales and all...

      (yes, I am going to hell for that one.)

    139. Re:Come on CA by Lodragandraoidh · · Score: 1

      An exageration to make a point or tell a story (or both) is not the same as lieing to gain some political end.

      --

      Lodragan Draoidh
      The more you explain it, the more I don't understand it. - Mark Twain
    140. Re:Come on CA by fnkleroi · · Score: 1

      That's the spirit!

      You should know by now that all Born Agains have a great love for story telling, and how each story can be used to help others understand their point of view.

    141. Re:Come on CA by hesiod · · Score: 1

      > If this constitutes a "slick" website, then I'm Jeffry Zeldman!

      Hi Jeff! Haven't seen many web pages, have you. That one isn't particularly bad, the guy isn't a fucking graphic artist!

    142. Re:Come on CA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      The article on snopes says one of the ninth-graders recognized it as water. Apparently, none of the officials did

      I actually saw something like this a few months ago on TV. A group went to a "Green Rally" (Hug the trees, save the snails, ...) and 80%+ signed a petition on banning the dangerous "Bihydrogen-oxide" causing several deatchs a year, a cause of obesity, and a major contributor to several natural disaster in recent years.

      After they signed they would say "Thank you for your help in banning water" and poeple then tried to leave as soon as possible!

    143. Re:Come on CA by shyster · · Score: 1, Insightful
      Well, you should have some basic knowledge of speaking English if you are native to the US....I've stumped people a number of times while asking for a 'negative atmosphere liquid transport device'....then, I just point at the straw.

      I completely agree that basic knowledge of the English language is a necessity. Which is why it's stupid to call a straw "a negative atmosphere liquid transport device".

      Everybody knows what a straw is. Not everybody should be expected to decode some linguist geek's idea of a practical joke for everyday terms. That's why we come up with names for common items...to prevent everyone calling it whatever they feel like at the moment. It enables us, as a society, to communicate with each other. If you'd rather use [arguably] more precise, scientific language to describe common ideas and terms, perhaps you should only communicate with other obvious prodigies and leave the rest of us normal people alone.

      Words and language are meant to effectively communicate ideas. While descriptive language for the purpose of clarifying intent is reasonable, purposefully discombulating the English language as to disguise the idea behind the words is juvenile and mildly retarded.

      And it's also quite simplistic, which is why it's nowhere near as humorous as a purported organization supporting the ban of dihydrogen monoxide. A lot of thought and effort went into that practical joke-which is why newspapers are picking up on it and laughing, too. Your straw joke has no one laughing but yourself...except, perhaps, at your notion that you are somehow intellectually superior because of it.

    144. Re:Come on CA by jerdenn · · Score: 1

      Hmm.. I like this law, as I'm not so far away from GA 400. Hope it passes. Either that, or I'll have to start sticking a Cruise Card on my forehead.

      -jerdenn

    145. Re:Come on CA by hesiod · · Score: 1

      > It should be illegal to drive while impared, and it is possible to test for imparement (ie, the physical DUI tests).

      While I agree that it should be illegal, I believe those "roadside sobriety tests" should not be allowed. There have been plenty of times I have been sober & wouldn't pass one, maybe because I was nervous/shaky, fatigued or even just tired (although that is just as dangerous as driving high). If some asshole cop decided that I looked drunk, I can be arrested for DUI even if I blow a 0.00 on the breathalyzer. This means I could have my license revoked while doing nothing wrong (aside from the first DUI, of course).

    146. Re:Come on CA by hesiod · · Score: 1

      > Sure, but which is more likely:

      This isn't an either/or. It is just as likely that a (friend or relative of a) councilman found this and wanted to look like he was working. Just like High school, sleeping behind a book to find out later that the book was upside-down the whole time.

    147. Re:Come on CA by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
      Geez, get a sense of humor...was just something my roommate and I came up with years ago studying for finals. We just came up with the weirdest way to say normal everyday things....

      Even so, I'd think anyone with normal intelligence should be able to interpret the straw one...or, at least, they should be able to.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    148. Re:Come on CA by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      No I expect them to know chemistry. They are all at least high school grads I hope. Di means two, Hydrogen I think is pretty clear, and oxide means oxygen. H20 = water. I do not feel this falls into the realm of chemistry I feel this is in the realm of thinking! Is it too much to expect that a person should be capable of thinking?

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    149. Re:Come on CA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Which state do you want us to secede from? Alaska?

    150. Re:Come on CA by jimsum · · Score: 1

      There have been studies to determine how much pot impairs your ability to drive, like this one:

      http://casr.adelaide.edu.au/T95/paper/s1p2.html

      Here's a good quote from the abstract:

      "Alcohol impaired performance relative to placebo but subjects did not perceive it. THC did not impair driving performance yet the subjects thought it had."

      Pot does not impair your ability to determine how impaired you are; if you think you are sober enough to drive, you are. This simple fact is not true of alcohol, it impairs your ability to tell how impaired you are. That is why alcohol is a problem and pot is not, at least as far as driving goes.

      The statistics show that stoned people do not get into accidents more often than sober people. That simply means that the people who choose to drive while stoned are no more likely to get in accidents than sober drivers. That doesn't mean that every driver is capable of driving while stoned, just that the people that do drive while stoned are correct in thinking that it is safe for them.

      --
      -- Pot is safer than Beer
    151. Re:Come on CA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No-one is expecting them to know chemistry, ...

      Wrong.

      I expect people who are elected to office to have a basic understanding of chemistry, physics, math, biology, psychology, sociology, history (multiple countries), reading (dominant language of the country and at least one class in another language), writing, speaking, the process of science, the process of communication, the basics of at least two disimilar religions whether or not they follow one, music, arts, and a basic understanding of their country's popular leisure activities (sports, TV, etc).

      I expect elected officials to have a basic understanding of the world around them and the people they are to govern.

      Without this basic understanding you WILL have bad government making stupid decisions.

    152. Re:Come on CA by ManoMarks · · Score: 1

      California didn't elect these people, the "good" people of Aliso Viejo, California did. Local government is often filled with overworked people who don't have time to check the work of their advisors. That's not an excuse, and if you RFTA, you'll see that they NEARLY passed the law, but didn't.

      I know I'm being testy, but every time someone does something boneheaded in CA, everyone says "There goes California again" but if they do something boneheaded in Ohio, which they do fairly often, everyone only responds "Why would anyone want to live in Ohio anyway, I guess they deserve a break for sticking it out"

      --

      That's gotta fit into your schema somewhere

    153. Re:Come on CA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not only that, but now there is a bill purposed that would reuce the age of voters to 14...if they are guillible eough to believe this (esp when considering peer pressure) then how easily will they be swayed by the person who is running for office with their multimillion dollar ad campaigns?

    154. Re:Come on CA by riffenator · · Score: 1

      The rest of the world should be so fortunate to have literary geniuses such as them in power.

      England does.

    155. Re:Come on CA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Awe shit! A state task force on self-esteem???

      All self-esteem does is turn people into righteous self-centered pricks who think they deserve everything! (Paris Hilton for example)

      We need to build self-efficacy in kids, not self-esteem!

      Self-esteem is the I DESERVE THIS attitude while self-efficacy is the I CAN DO THIS.

    156. Re:Come on CA by jmccay · · Score: 1

      That's why a robotis council will rule cities and countries in the 24th and 25 centuries....wait that's a Buck Rogers flash back... ok never mind that.

      --
      At the next eco-hypocrisy-meeting, count the private jets used to get to the meeting. Should be interesting to see that
    157. Re:Come on CA by Tantrum420 · · Score: 1

      >You should never generalize.

      That's because all generalizations are false...

      T

    158. Re:Come on CA by nomadic · · Score: 1

      Humor? Does anyone still find this tired old joke funny anymore?

    159. Re:Come on CA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Like I'd trust the recollection of a pot-head :-}

    160. Re:Come on CA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Data from one female subject were excluded from the results because no drug was found in her plasma after smoking."

      Chelsea Clinton?

    161. Re:Come on CA by shodson · · Score: 1

      Give us Californians a break, it's not like we'd elect an action hero to be our governor or anything ludicrous like that...

    162. Re:Come on CA by Dirtside · · Score: 2, Funny
      God I hate California
      That's okay. We don't like you either, but we outnumber you 34 million to one. Come visit sometime! Our governor can crush your skull with his bare hands*.

      * New California state motto.

      --
      "Destroy science and religion. Science would re-emerge exactly the same; but not religion." - Penn Jillette, paraphrased
    163. Re:Come on CA by LMariachi · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Obviously, not a single biochemist was consulted before deciding to bring this issue to a vote. Shoot, they could have just asked a high school chem teacher.

      I guess they must have asked someone, since they figured out what dihydrogen monoxide is and the scheduled vote was removed from the agenda. I'd say whatever error-checking system they have in place worked pretty well. The issue never came to a vote.

    164. Re:Come on CA by pyrrhonist · · Score: 2, Interesting
      nowadays a lot of the Styrofoam-like material used for package peanuts is made from starch. it dissolves in water pretty quickly.

      They're also edible obviously, though they don't have much taste. It's fun to open a package that just arrived by UPS in front of your co-workers and start snacking on the "styrofoam" peanuts. All you have to do is keep a straight face while doing it, and when they look back at you in pure horror, just innocently say, "What? Oh, sorry. Want some?"

      --
      Show me on the doll where his noodly appendage touched you.
    165. Re:Come on CA by pyrrhonist · · Score: 2, Funny
      I dont care what any study says on that. ive smoked plenty of pot to know that i wouldn't be safe driving if i was high on it.

      Well, I'm not going to believe a pothead. I still think it's safe to drive under the influence of pot.

      --
      Show me on the doll where his noodly appendage touched you.
    166. Re:Come on CA by geekoid · · Score: 1

      "Exactly the reason why government should be kept as small as possible."

      now there's the catch.
      How small is small as possible?
      Is it the right size now, just in the wrong areas?
      Is it too small now?
      too big?
      What services should government agency be responsible for, and thus need to tax?
      If you think the governmant is 'too big', a few more tax cuts and we'll lose all services. So it will be small. Of course it won't impact legislators income, just the people that are needed to get work done.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    167. Re:Come on CA by MC_Cancer_Pants · · Score: 1

      Only on slashdot does an article about a 14 year old boy and legislation turn into a marijuana debate.

    168. Re:Come on CA by macdaddy357 · · Score: 1

      Homer? D'oh!

      --
      How ya like dat?
    169. Re:Come on CA by mj2k · · Score: 1

      Are you surprised - Arnold just couldn't understand the whole article.

    170. Re:Come on CA by SmackCrackandPot · · Score: 2, Funny

      We should be grateful they came across that website and didn't come across the Aluminum Foil Deflector Beanie web site. They would have made Beanie hats mandatory for all state residents.

    171. Re:Come on CA by mattyrobinson69 · · Score: 1

      thats actually quite funny:

      you wont take advice not to drive when high, from someone who used to smoke pot (because they used to smoke pot)

    172. Re:Come on CA by mattyrobinson69 · · Score: 1

      i was actually joking with the "dumb-ass giggly shtick", but youve never seen a stoner giggle?

      i do agree though that if your high on pot, your paranoid as fuck, so your going to be driving at about 6 mph and checking your mirrors every few seconds.

      once i was walking down the street (really really fucked) and i crossed a road conciously. after i crossed the road, i carried on walking straight on, but i halloucianated that i turned round and looked down the road i had just passed. i realised where i actually was before i walked straight into a very big road. with that in mind, i would never drive a car after smoking weed.

      (i dont smoke the stuff anymore anyway - i prefer a nice pint of tetleys bitter)

    173. Re:Come on CA by DroppedPacket · · Score: 1

      (See sig)

      --
      I am not a resource! I am a free man!
    174. Re:Come on CA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      we shouldn't entrust the people's freedoms and rights to the government

      What rights do you have if there is no authority to guarantee them?

    175. Re:Come on CA by shyster · · Score: 1
      I have a sense of humor...thankfully, I just don't have yours.

      As for people with "normal intelligence" interpreting the straw "riddle", I think you greatly overestimate the population's college education and time away from college fluid mechanics courses.

      Though I'm too lazy to look up facts in support of this, I'd wager a minority of the population has attended and/or graduated from college. Furthermore, I'd wager an even smaller percentage have taken a 2nd level physics class that would possibly expose them to the science of air pressures and vacuums. And, to top it off, I'd guess that a reasonable median of the age of this population would be in the mid-40's. That means that those who did attend college, and who did take a physics course that explained to them air pressure equalization would have had 20+ years in which to forget it all. And, if that wasn't enough, the issue was further confused by replacing the somewhat common term "vacuum" with "negative atmosphere".

      Just because you learned something in college doesn't make it something deducible from "normal intelligence". That's why you had to go to college to learn it.

    176. Re:Come on CA by pyrrhonist · · Score: 1
      you wont take advice not to drive when high, from someone who used to smoke pot (because they used to smoke pot)

      You got it. That was the point. I forgot the "<sarcasm>" tags, sorry.

      --
      Show me on the doll where his noodly appendage touched you.
    177. Re:Come on CA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      However, I submit that expecting perfect decision-making 100% of the time from leaders is akin to expecting coders to write non-trivial code that works perfectly on first execution.

      This is totally different.

      The problem here is not that they made a technical error. It is that they don't realize that, if they're going to be passing laws involving scientific and technical matters, it is essential to involve real live scientific and technical experts in the decision making process.

      Some people have the idea that looking at random documents on the web constitutes research. That is the basic problem here. This law is only the tip of the iceberg. How many other ill-informed laws will they pass, and how many have they already passed, because they do not feel that they need to consult actual experts about technical matters?

    178. Re:Come on CA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh well, California hates God too. And you can't really fault 'em for that, with the floods and wildfires and all.

    179. Re:Come on CA by Lost+Race · · Score: 1

      Only on Slashdot? The same thing has been happening on Usenet for at least 20 years. More commonly the argument turns to gun control or abortion, but marijuana is popular too.

    180. Re:Come on CA by nomadic · · Score: 1

      Well chemistry's a funny thing. Like intuitively you'd think that H202 was something similar to water, rather than something you really wouldn't want to drink.

    181. Re:Come on CA by Qutec · · Score: 1

      Sign says: "WARNING only 20% oxygen in this area! Authorized personnel only!" The secretary never came in the lab,....

    182. Re:Come on CA by nartz · · Score: 1

      Who does get super-user access then, say, in times of emergency, when the virus is maliciously destroying files, or the terrorists are crashing airplanes into buildings? I say give the power to the people! Equality for everyone, turn Red today! A specter is haunting slashdot...

    183. Re:Come on CA by CheeseTroll · · Score: 1
      I believe that's the case for other southwestern states, as well, and also applies to hamsters, guinea pigs, etc. The fear is that if they escape (er, I mean when they escape), they'll breed like crazy in the warm climate, unlike in Chicago where they'll never survive for long outside.

      Seems awfully paranoid. What are the chances that a female gerbil will stumble upon a male gerbil in the sewers? Don't they have cats/owls/hawks in CA?

      Maybe a paralegal watched the Tribbles episode of Star Trek and decided action must be taken!

      --
      A post a day keeps productivity at bay.
    184. Re:Come on CA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you cannot consume enough THC tablets to over dose either.

      your stomach cannot ingest that much.

      so that point is moot.

    185. Re:Come on CA by DJerman · · Score: 2

      Don't suck too many of those starch foam noodles down, they often contain anti-fungals to prevent stinky packages...

      --
    186. Re:Come on CA by forii · · Score: 1
      How small is small as possible?

      Of course there is no quick answer, but let me suggest a few guidelines. The original poster pointed out that making Government, like writing code, is not trivial, and is prone to error. In light of this (and to stretch a metaphor even further), I propose:

      Memory Management/Scheduling:Government should not have the unrestricted ability to allocate resources for itself.

      Garbage Collection:Government should regularly be checked and cleaned of resources that have been allocated, but are not being used.

      Functionality:Government programs should be checked for correctness and efficiency. Those that do not accomplish the stated purpose should be terminated.

      Currently, in the United States, we have a government where failed programs are rewarded with more money, useless (pork) programs are everywhere, and even where the Government doesn't fail, the only area that it seems to excel is in creating more Government.

      Even worse is the fact that we have it better off than most other countries around the world.

    187. Re:Come on CA by the+argonaut · · Score: 1

      . . .disimilar. . .

      I guess that eliminates you.

      Regards,

      The Spelling Nazi

      --
      fuck you.
    188. Re:Come on CA by Shinmizu · · Score: 1

      "3. Intelligence is not a prime prerequisite for paralegals or politicians." Drat. It'll be much harder to level up as a politician without that +10% bonus to XP.

    189. Re:Come on CA by Entropy2016 · · Score: 1

      Absolutely, and that's why we're doing our best to improve society for the people that we represent, which is why we need electronic voting...

    190. Re:Come on CA by Canadian_Daemon · · Score: 1

      Who the fuck modded this as interesting?

      --
      This sig is definitive. Reality is frequently inaccurate.
    191. Re:Come on CA by Planx_Constant · · Score: 1

      Interesting fact: Did you know that there is no sanitary handwashing code for shipping clerks? Happy snacking :)

      --
      Heisenberg might have been here.
    192. Re:Come on CA by pyrrhonist · · Score: 1
      Interesting? Funny mod!

      I have to remember to put my posts inside <joke_not_real> tags.

      :)

      --
      Show me on the doll where his noodly appendage touched you.
    193. Re:Come on CA by hedge_death_shootout · · Score: 1

      Humor is almost always based on some exaggeration.

      Indeed.

      Read that again...

    194. Re:Come on CA by thelasttemptation · · Score: 1

      actually some of them contain something to keep mice from eating them, and if mice don't wanna eat them, I sure as hell don't...

    195. Re:Come on CA by pz · · Score: 1

      That, reducto ad absurdum, argument is not what I was asserting. I was merely pointing out that the statement on THC consumption being self-limiting is false because of the availability of concentrated forms. (And, although I didn't emphasise this point earlier, the *ready* availability of concentrated forms.)

      Your argument about nicotine is not as powerful as you might like because of the relative lack of availability of concentrated injectable nicotine. It is possible to physically ingest large quantities of tobacco (chewing style, specifically) which may be sufficient to induce death before they are expelled, but that is not what you were arguing.

      So, while there are many reasons why we, as a society, might want to ban cigarettes, your asserting is not one widely considered among them.

      --

      Put my fist through my alarm clock with its ding-dong death inside my ear. - The Blackjacks.
    196. Re:Come on CA by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      Actually I heard of some health nuts that drank H202. I am pretty shure that it was very diluted since I have not heard of any of them exploding.
      Sorry but anyone that fell for that is stupid and should at best be working in the fast food industry. Sorry to them majority of fast food workers that know what H2O is.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    197. Re:Come on CA by Insipid+Trunculance · · Score: 1

      California is the little kid who's parents never ever told him "no".

      I am extremely annoyed by your sexist sentence.You have made me so angry i am hardly coherent.I am appalled by your non-feminine-acknowledging post.The sentence should read California is the little kid who's parents never ever told her "no".

      Besides it was my Lady whose parents never ever said no to.

      --
      Wanted : A Signature.
    198. Re:Come on CA by liquidsin · · Score: 1

      First off, let me state that I'm a casual cigarette smoker (a pack lasts me a week or so) and a pretty big fan of marijuana, and I wasn't trying to shoot down your argument or call for the banning of tobacco and/or marijuana. I was merely trying to make the point that many things that are perfectly legal are lethal if used improperly or excessively. Would you have preferred that I made the argument that I could go to any dollar store, buy a can of butane for refilling lighters or candles, and huff that until I'm blind/paralyzed/dead? Same goes for air dusters that a lot of us use for cleaning dust out of our computers. I was more referencing back a few comments to the original poster who said that nobody had ever died from a marijuana overdose. Most users of marijuana smoke it, so the original argument still stands as true. Alcohol CAN be fatal in large enough quantities, when consumed as it's supposed to be (drinking) but I'd bet it's even more fatal if you dunk your face in a bucket full and try to inhale it. Still, I don't see anyone outlawing vodka because people could drown in it.

      --
      do not read this line twice.
    199. Re:Come on CA by Rakarra · · Score: 1
      My favorite law is that California doesn't allow people to own gerbils. That's right, they'll send you to jail for owning a gerbil.

      Probably because Richard Gere lives here.

    200. Re:Come on CA by jargonCCNA · · Score: 1

      Just about any building built within the past few decades in Canada is insulated using STYROFOAM SM. Probably the States, too. Another Dow product that's pretty much ubiquitous in Canada -- refrigerator door seals. That seal is a Dow product.

      --
      Matthew G P Coe
      http://mgpcoe.blogspot.com/
    201. Re:Come on CA by fuzzybunny · · Score: 1

      Well, you should have some basic knowledge of speaking English

      "...of spoken English".

      mean the same whether here or another English speaking country

      "...or in another English speaking country.

      Written English doesn't hurt, either.

      --
      Cole's Law: Thinly sliced cabbage
  2. Please allow me by Killjoy_NL · · Score: 0

    Let me be the first to say

    BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHHAHAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    But seriously, they shouldn't name that stuff so dangerously. I can understand the confusion.

    Some research should have been done.

    Fun though, this made my day :D

    --
    This is the sig that says NI (again)
    1. Re:Please allow me by NemosomeN · · Score: 4, Insightful

      But seriously, they shouldn't name that stuff so dangerously. I can understand the confusion. Erm, that's a standard naming convention for molecules. (IUPEC Naming maybe? Can't remember.)

      --
      I hate grammar Nazi's.
    2. Re:Please allow me by Agent+Orange · · Score: 2, Informative

      That would be "IUPAC" I presume - the International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry.

      I think, as has been noted elsewhere, that hydrogen hydroxide is more correct, but it's really only semantic. And it's been a long time since my chem lectures. Chemistry's just applied physics anyway :-)

    3. Re:Please allow me by DrFrob · · Score: 2, Informative
      Then they learned, to their chagrin, that dihydrogen monoxide -- H2O for short -- is the scientific term for water.

      Back off man, I'm a scientist.

      The scientific term for water is water. The only time I've ever heard the term dihydrogen monoxide is in reference to making fun of people who think atoms are little balls.

    4. Re:Please allow me by NemosomeN · · Score: 1

      I guess a better way to say that "Dihydrogen Monoxide" would be "a scientific name," since it's arrived at by a standard naming convention (Although it IS an exception, and therefore it's not the right name, but it is a name that describes water sufficiently to be able to know what it is if you know the naming convention). And "Hydrogen Hydroxide" is not "more correct." Water is molecular, not ionic, even though it does undergo auto-ionization.

      --
      I hate grammar Nazi's.
  3. PATHETIC by psichaotic · · Score: 0, Insightful

    this is simply amazing.

  4. You know they forgot... by Azadre · · Score: 5, Funny

    You know they forgot to put the word gullible in the dictionary right?

    1. Re:You know they forgot... by RichardX · · Score: 2, Funny

      Eh?
      *looks in dictionary*
      Nah, here it is, see?

      And y'know, no matter how many times I say it, or how fast, I just can't figure how "banana" sounds like "gulliable"...

      --
      Curiosity was framed. Ignorance killed the cat.
    2. Re:You know they forgot... by EvanED · · Score: 3, Funny

      It really isn't in Dictionary.com..

      No entry found for gullibl.

      Did you mean gull ibl?
      Suggestions:
      gull ibl
      gull-ibl
      cullible
      glibly

    3. Re:You know they forgot... by LO0G · · Score: 5, Funny

      My wife's 5/6 grade class couldn't believe that it was a hoax when they went to http://www.buydehydratedwater.com so they ended up ordering some :)

      It's sad what people will believe.

    4. Re:You know they forgot... by DaveHowe · · Score: 0, Offtopic
      *FX* - hits author with the +5 Spikey Club of "you didn't get the joke the first time"

      :)

      --
      -=DaveHowe=-
    5. Re:You know they forgot... by grub · · Score: 5, Funny


      Heh, semi-related true story.

      Years back I was a starving student working at a paint store. We jugged our own 4L paint thinners from large holding tanks out back. Anyhow, I jugged a few 4L containers of tap water. Then I printed out some nice labels that said "LATEX PAINT THINNER" with the usual comments about adding slowly, stirring well, etc.

      Priced them at $3.99/4L and people would actually bring the up to the cashier. We'd tell them there that it was a joke so there was no ripping off done.

      --
      Trolling is a art,
    6. Re:You know they forgot... by NMerriam · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I should note (as an artist) that different kinds of water behave differently in paint. I would have just assumed it was distilled water had I seen the bottles. Not that you would need particularly pure water for latex paint, but some people like to buy the Rolls Royce of everything.

      --
      Recursive: Adj. See Recursive.
    7. Re:You know they forgot... by justanyone · · Score: 4, Interesting
      These sites are very funny!

      Of course they're scams / humor sites, but they look really real!

      I'm somewhat surprised by these, too. I believe they're encouraging people to commit a felony (identity theft), as well as fraud (not paying debts). I believe this may mean they are engaging in a criminal conspiracy, even if they don't know the other parties to the conspiracy. IANAL, someone please review and respond?

      Here's some links:


    8. Re:You know they forgot... by dr-suess-fan · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      But that's OK, cuz 'redundant' was put in twice.

    9. Re:You know they forgot... by ChuyMatt · · Score: 0

      Well THAT was Un-American of you! Let the customer decide! oh... yah, that would be "unethical"

    10. Re:You know they forgot... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny


      Well THAT was Un-American of you!

      Yeah.. I'm a Canadian.. :)

    11. Re:You know they forgot... by damien_kane · · Score: 1

      But that's OK, cuz 'redundant' was put in twice.

      And it got modded (-1:Troll, +1:Informative, +2 Insightful), then got re-posted the next day.

      Yes, I also saw the dictionary Slashdot released.

    12. Re:You know they forgot... by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Check out this vintage (last modified aug 15 1997) webpage. AFAIK that page is the first web-based anti-dhmo unit you'll find (waybck archives might say ~no_dhmo, IIRC we went from some variant of Unix that allowed underscores in usernames, to one which didn't.) I haven't lived at the circus in some time though :)

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    13. Re:You know they forgot... by John+Harrison · · Score: 1

      We could tell by the liters! However, you are still "North American", which (too bad for you!) is still a form of American.

    14. Re:You know they forgot... by DavidTC · · Score: 1

      Being a Canadian is Unamerican! I'm going to report you!

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
    15. Re:You know they forgot... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Bottled water at less then 1$/L? That sound like a deal to me.

    16. Re:You know they forgot... by drooling-dog · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Priced them at $3.99/4L and people would actually bring the up to the cashier.

      I know people who pay about the same price for bottled drinking water.

    17. Re:You know they forgot... by Savage-Rabbit · · Score: 4, Funny

      Years ago one of my biology teachers decided to crack a joke. After spending a long time explaining multi-cellular organisms and their evolution from single-cell organisms he asked the class:

      "Will all the single cell organisms in the room please raise their hands!"

      I was amazed to find my self as one of three kids not to do so, the entire rest of the class had a hand in the air. And people wonder why teachers suffer under a constant nagging feeling that they are wasting their time.

      --
      Only to idiots, are orders laws.
      -- Henning von Tresckow
    18. Re:You know they forgot... by b1t+r0t · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I particularly enjoy the Google Ads on the Carbon Free Diamonds page. Ain't it wonderful how Google Ads can give a joke site more credibility by throwing random related ads on the page? (Buy Dehydrated Water has them too, but they're not a spiffy.)

      --

      --
      "Open source is good." - Steve Jobs
      "Open source is evil." - Microsoft
    19. Re:You know they forgot... by ThogScully · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I don't believe you, but in order to prove you wrong, I have to fall for it. Tough decisions...
      -N

      --
      I've nothing to say here...
    20. Re:You know they forgot... by SocietyoftheFist · · Score: 1

      Ever talked to a plumber? Ask them about the condition of the pipes that deliver the water to you. I'm not talking about your house pipes, I'm talking about the main lines. You won't drink water from the tap anymore unless it's heavily filtered.

    21. Re:You know they forgot... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      "Open source is good." - Steve Jobs
      "Open source is evil." - Microsoft

      "Open computers are evil." - Steve Jobs
      "Open computers are good." - Microsoft

    22. Re:You know they forgot... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Once again....

      Explaining the joke: Effectively sucking the humor out of a gag since 1982.

      Why can't something just be funny??

    23. Re:You know they forgot... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What about the condition of the pipes that delivered the water to the bottle? You somehow trust THAT handling (unlicensed and unregulated) to automatically be better (or heck, even different).

      You may be Evian, spelled backwards...

    24. Re:You know they forgot... by mpe · · Score: 1

      My wife's 5/6 grade class couldn't believe that it was a hoax when they went to http://www.buydehydratedwater.com so they ended up ordering some :)

      But you'd hope adults in charge of spending huge sums of money would be a bit more knowlagable than a 10 year old school kid. The issue is along the lines of "if they are that easy to fool...".

    25. Re:You know they forgot... by amembleton · · Score: 1

      From the "cool jobs" section of buydehydratedwater.com:

      BENIFITS:

      Free dehydrated water
      Employee events
      Casual work environment
      401k program
      Dental/Medical/Vision plan
      Unlimited Stress
      Harassment of all sorts
      Yearly bonus
      Term life insurance
      Long term disability
      3 Vacation days/year
      2 sick days/year

      Free transportation to work by mule
      Complimentary Twinkies
      Minimum wage salary
      Free paper clips
      Usage of restroom facilities
      Ketchup packets from McDonalds
      Napkins from Del Taco
      Straws from 7-Eleven
      Usage of our customers' credit cards
      Unlimited toilet paper
      Office supplies to use at work
      Air conditioned office (Winter months only)

    26. Re:You know they forgot... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > I was amazed to find my self as one of three kids not to do so,

      You got stuffed into lockers a lot, didn't you? There's a few dumb-ass kids, yes. More kids decided that it'd be funny to raise their hands. Others went along. Seriously, did you always have such a superiority complex?

    27. Re:You know they forgot... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can tell the difference between bottled/filtered water and tap water. Just because I have better taste buds than you do doesn't mean that I'm the naive one. Besides, who the fuck cares if I buy bottled water? It's my money. Shut the hell up if you can't tell the difference.

    28. Re:You know they forgot... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Take a close look at the photo of the cute girl in the T-shirt. Even that's fake.

      Hint: the text is horizontal

    29. Re:You know they forgot... by DunbarTheInept · · Score: 1, Insightful

      The joke was built on a false assumption - that anyone buying the paint is an ignoramus who doesn't know that latex paint disolves in water. The explanation shows that there could still be a reason to buy 'paint thinner' - if it's pure distilled water that works better than what you get from your tap. Perhaps you think humor is so important that it's okay to ridicule undeserving people for it. Some people don't.

      --

      Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.

    30. Re:You know they forgot... by DunbarTheInept · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I drink tapwater *because* it's impure. For one thing it tastes better that way (bottled water tastes like...nothing.) And for another, the human immune system works better when it gets to practice on something - that's the premise behind innoculations.

      I do make an exception for the tapwater at work, however. It's an old building with terrible pipes because it's had biochemistry experiments being conducted in it for over a century - with all manner of corrosive compounds being used. I insist that my tapwater at least *look* clear before I drink it. The tapwater at work often comes out yellowish, with chunks of stuff in it.
      No, I'm not kidding. You can also see brown stains on all the drinking fountains' porcelin where the water regularly runs, and all the pipes I can see when the ceiling tiles are pulled aside are covered in crusty green stuff.

      --

      Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.

    31. Re:You know they forgot... by ibbey · · Score: 1

      I know people who pay about the same price for bottled drinking water.

      How about $39 / 20 oz. (roughly .66 liter) for M-Water, AKA "Water that has been ... energized and vibrationally balanced". Some people have to much money.

    32. Re:You know they forgot... by LO0G · · Score: 1

      My favorite comment from the site FAQ:

      "What kind of reaction can I expect from my cat and plant if I only feed them dehydrated water?"

      Response: Dead cat. Dead plant. If you only consume one type of product and nothing else, you will ruin your body. You must have a well balanced diet; even with dehydrated water.

    33. Re:You know they forgot... by sepluv · · Score: 1
      In the U.K. the cost of London tap water with small quantities of spunk added(courtesy of Coca-Cola) is nearly that much for a tiny bottle.

      Partcularly note the notice about trading standards investigations and media speculation on the UK Dasani homepage and the spunk link.

      --
      Joe Llywelyn Griffith Blakesley
      [This post is in the public domain (copyright-free) unless otherwise stated]
    34. Re:You know they forgot... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't forget bonsai kittens!

    35. Re:You know they forgot... by spood · · Score: 1

      Teacher says she's tired of trying.

      --
      ---- Just another spud server.
    36. Re:You know they forgot... by edack · · Score: 1

      Quick someone explain about iron deposits and copper corrosion.

    37. Re:You know they forgot... by DunbarTheInept · · Score: 1

      I know the iron and copper are what makes it visible, and that they are not particularly harmful. The problem is that the fact that the pipes are in such a state of decay makes me wonder just how bad the water really is, with regards to the stuff I *can't* see. It's obvious that the system is in a
      state of poor repair. They won't fix it because the building is condemned and scheduled to be torn down in a few years.

      --

      Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.

    38. Re:You know they forgot... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually it's even worse than you think. It's $39 for a 16.9 oz. bottle, not a 20 oz.

    39. Re:You know they forgot... by ndogg · · Score: 1

      What's funny about the parent's joke is that I actually convinced an English teacher in high school of this, up until he actually walked up to the dictionary.

      --
      // file: mice.h
      #include "frickin_lasers.h"
    40. Re:You know they forgot... by drooling-dog · · Score: 1
      You won't drink water from the tap anymore unless it's heavily filtered.

      Mine's fine, thanks, YMMV...

      But a buck a liter? You'd howl if your gasoline cost that much. You do know that you're just getting somebody else's tap/well water, right? Costs next to nothing to filter it, so it must be those costly cosmic vibrations they add... or something. With the right advertising you can make anything seem reasonable, I guess...

    41. Re:You know they forgot... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was amazed to find my self as one of three kids not to do so, the entire rest of the class had a hand in the air.

      Given the kids I went to school with, they were probably quite close to being right.

    42. Re:You know they forgot... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Carbon Free Diamonds, Inc. is slashdotted!

      509 Bandwidth Limit Exceeded.

    43. Re:You know they forgot... by thefixer · · Score: 1

      I just visited the "Vend-A-Temp" site. If you click through on the link to "Live Help Online" you'll actually be talking to a "Vend-A-Temp" representative. I was offered a job in India for about $3/ day! Pretty good deal!

    44. Re:You know they forgot... by Sri+Lumpa · · Score: 1


      Yeah, but they will have to have him deported from Canada for being Unamerican. I think if they do that with every unamerican persons on the planet you will solve the illegal immigration problem in the US.

      --
      "The obvious mathematical breakthrough would be development of an easy way to factor large prime numbers." Bill Gates,
    45. Re:You know they forgot... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've got a mail-in rebate for those guys ;-))

  5. Amazing...but true by CptTripps · · Score: 1

    This was our favorite topic at dinner last night. It's amazing what people will believe without looking up facts on their own.

    --


    My .sig can beat up your honor student.
  6. Dihydrogen Monoxide *is* dangerous by Jonas+the+Bold · · Score: 5, Funny

    Thousands of people die on beaches every year from DHM inhalation.

    --
    Everything seemed to be going so nice
    'till the end of all beings punched right through the ice
    1. Re:Dihydrogen Monoxide *is* dangerous by mgs1000 · · Score: 5, Funny
      ...and 100% of all people who died last year were found to have significant levels of it in their bloodstream.

      (That was a great episode of Penn & Teller's show,btw)

    2. Re:Dihydrogen Monoxide *is* dangerous by sosume · · Score: 3, Funny

      Real geeks have known for long that getting DHMO on the skin can cause serious irritations and should therefore be avoided at all costs..

    3. Re:Dihydrogen Monoxide *is* dangerous by dustmote · · Score: 1

      I know, I thought they had banned this stuff years ago. :) A friend circulated petitions in college to that effect. Not only is it dangerous, but terribly addictive - everyone who has ever consumed it develops an insaitable craving for more.

      --


      -1, "1337" speak
    4. Re:Dihydrogen Monoxide *is* dangerous by Brahmastra · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Actually, there really is something called water overdose and apparently it can kill you.

    5. Re:Dihydrogen Monoxide *is* dangerous by ObiWanKenblowme · · Score: 1

      Don't forget about the fatal withdrawal symptoms!

      --
      Obvious exits are NORTH, SOUTH, and DENNIS.
    6. Re:Dihydrogen Monoxide *is* dangerous by Carl+T · · Score: 1, Funny
      100% of all people who died last year were found to have significant levels of it in their bloodstream.

      Really? Even those that had been burned, freeze-dried, or simply sucked dry by a particularly thirsty vampire?

      --

      This signature is not in the public domain.
    7. Re:Dihydrogen Monoxide *is* dangerous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, before alcohol became accessible, we used to play "water poker" where the loser has to drink. Liked the "intoxication", didn't like the waking up four times next night.

    8. Re:Dihydrogen Monoxide *is* dangerous by Fishstick · · Score: 5, Funny
      We should ban it!! It is a major component of another hazardous product



      1: More than 98 percent of convicted felons are bread eaters.

      2: Fully HALF of all children who grow up in bread-consuming households score below average on standardized tests.

      3: In the 18th century, when virtually all bread was baked in the home, the average life expectancy was less than 50 years; infant mortality rates were unacceptably high; many women died in childbirth; and diseases such as typhoid, yellow fever and influenza ravaged whole nations.

      4: More than 90 percent of violent crimes are committed within 24 hours of eating bread.

      5: Bread is made from a substance called "dough." It has been proven that as little as one pound of dough can be used to suffocate a mouse. The average American eats more bread than that in one month!

      6: Primitive tribal societies that have no bread exhibit a low occurrence of cancer, Alzheimer's, Parkinson's disease and osteoporosis.

      7: Bread has been proven to be addictive. Subjects deprived of bread and given only water to eat begged for bread after only two days.

      8: Bread is often a "gateway" food item, leading the user to "harder" items such as butter, jelly, peanut butter and even cold cuts.

      9: Bread has been proven to absorb water. Since the human body is more than 90 percent water, it follows that eating bread could lead to your body being taken over by this absorptive food product, turning you into a soggy, gooey bread-pudding person.

      10: Newborn babies can choke on bread.

      11: Bread is baked at temperatures as high as 400 degrees Fahrenheit! That kind of heat can kill an adult in less than one minute.

      12: Most American bread eaters are utterly unable to distinguish between significant scientific fact and meaningless statistical babbling.

      --

      There is much cruelty in the universe, John.
      Yeah, we seem to have the tour map.

    9. Re:Dihydrogen Monoxide *is* dangerous by nomadic · · Score: 1

      I don't know the details of styrofoam manufacture but you could conceivably object to it's using water in its manufacturing. There IS a general shortage of clean, potable water on the planet, and cotton growing (which uses obscene amounts of water) is (rightly in my mind) criticized for its insane water use.

    10. Re:Dihydrogen Monoxide *is* dangerous by ajs318 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Leah Betts died of drinking too much water. She took an Ecstasy tablet while her {rabidly anti-some-drugs} dad was out -- then heard he was due back before she would wear off. Fearful of a bollocking on his early return, she drank several litres of water in a misguided attempt to counteract the effects of the drug. This caused an electrolyte imbalance, leading to multiple organ failure -- including the brain -- and eventual death.

      Legal ecstasy tablets probably would include an information sheet detailing safe usage practicesm and this would never have happened. However, the government, breweries and the tobacco companies all would prefer for you to believe that she was killed by a tab of ecstasy.

      --
      Je fume. Tu fumes. Nous fûmes!
    11. Re:Dihydrogen Monoxide *is* dangerous by malf-uk · · Score: 2, Funny

      I've heard that wicked witches all over Oz are calling for it to be banned too.

      --
      R Tape loading error, 0:1
    12. Re:Dihydrogen Monoxide *is* dangerous by dmd · · Score: 1

      Note that #2 is incorrect - change 'average' to 'median'.

    13. Re:Dihydrogen Monoxide *is* dangerous by Entropius · · Score: 1

      Then they didn't have much a bloodstream!

    14. Re:Dihydrogen Monoxide *is* dangerous by PYves · · Score: 1

      One example of water overdose - drowning.

    15. Re:Dihydrogen Monoxide *is* dangerous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      'average' can mean 'median' too, its a catch-all for either the mean, median or mode that marketers love to abuse.

    16. Re:Dihydrogen Monoxide *is* dangerous by CrazyTalk · · Score: 1

      Sounds like it wasn't too much water that was the problem so much as a lack of sodium due to him sweating so much and just replacing the fluids he lost with plain water.

    17. Re:Dihydrogen Monoxide *is* dangerous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OK, I'll bite.

      Median {middle of list if you lined them all up in order; aka 50th centile}, mode {most frequently occurring value}, arithmetical mean {sum divided by sample size} and geometrical mean {sample size-th root of product} are all different types of average. The median and mode can be determined visually from an ogive {median is halfway along the horizontal axis, mode is where the slope is steepest} and are often more representative than either of the means, particularly when dealing with blind ranges {i.e. where there is a fixed limit at one end only -- salaries for instance. Most countries have a minimum wage, but few [IMHO too few] have a maximum wage}.

      The arithmetical mean probably became more popular with the advent of the idiot-calculator. As for the geometrical mean, if you have to use this you probably should have been working with ln(x).

    18. Re:Dihydrogen Monoxide *is* dangerous by cev · · Score: 1


      Hyponatremia is a big problem for hikers in the grand canyon. An entire group of hikers died of it back in the mid-90's.

      http://www.nps.gov/grca/grandcanyon/dayhike/smar t. htm

      CV

    19. Re:Dihydrogen Monoxide *is* dangerous by AlCoHoLiC · · Score: 1

      Strange, few years ago I've drunk slightly over 30 lagers in less than 12 hours. Yet I failed to drown my brain. I guess they don't call me alcoholic for nothing.

    20. Re:Dihydrogen Monoxide *is* dangerous by Nic-o-demus · · Score: 2, Funny

      Hi. I'm a paralegal for the city hall here in Laguna Niguel, CA. Could someone please verify the varacity of the points above? I've been doing some research along similar lines. Thanks!

    21. Re:Dihydrogen Monoxide *is* dangerous by dragoncortez · · Score: 1

      I hope someone forwards this to the city of Aliso Viejo, because they could be in serious trouble. I bet they have a serious bread problem in their city.

      --
      Making stupid comments so you don't have to.
    22. Re:Dihydrogen Monoxide *is* dangerous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Legal ecstasy tablets probably would include an information sheet detailing safe usage practicesm and this would never have happened.

      Right, because a panicking girl will stop to read the information sheet.

      No, the reason legal ecstasy would help, if at al, is because her father wouldn't have as much of a problem with it. But that's not a given, lots of people are strongly opposed to legal drugs, especially when taken by minors.

    23. Re:Dihydrogen Monoxide *is* dangerous by Chris+Burkhardt · · Score: 1

      I think the Ecstasy deserves more blame than you are giving it. Almost the exact same thing happened to a girl who goes to a local high school here (Brittney Chambers).

      I'm not convinced Leah was drinking water because she was afraid of her father. Ecstasy is known to elevate body temperature, and a natural response is to drink water.

      --
      "And there be unix which have made themselves unix for the kingdom of heaven's sake." - Matt. 19:12
    24. Re:Dihydrogen Monoxide *is* dangerous by horza · · Score: 1

      Legal ecstasy tablets probably would include an information sheet detailing safe usage practicesm and this would never have happened. However, the government, breweries and the tobacco companies all would prefer for you to believe that she was killed by a tab of ecstasy.

      Taking ecstacy plus water = death. Drinking same amount of water != death. Ergo she WAS killed by the tab of ecstacy. There are a number of women each year that commit suicide by taking a bottle of sleeping pills then drinking alcohol. We still say she died of a pill overdose. Clearly labelling the tabs with instructions would help (no reason why it needs the government, in a capitalist market those that sell the tabs should have an interest in keeping their clients alive and so instructing them) but it won't stop accidents from happening. It's a shame but the people that take them now know the risk (as they do with alcohol and cigarettes).

      Phillip.

    25. Re:Dihydrogen Monoxide *is* dangerous by Abcd1234 · · Score: 1

      Yup. Of course, if people were *educated* about this side effect, and thus had an idea about what was happening to them, these sorts of things might not happen so often. After all, we educate teens about the dangers of alcohol poisoning, so why not do the same for other drugs? Oh, right, because talking about them would appear to legitimize their use. Kinda like sex education.

    26. Re:Dihydrogen Monoxide *is* dangerous by poot_rootbeer · · Score: 1

      How many liters of water, exactly, did she drink? From what I've heard, it takes something like 1/3 of one's body weight in water to cause water toxicity in a healthy person. More likely, the illicit drugs she was one were a significant contributing factor.

      Legal ecstasy tablets probably would include an information sheet detailing safe usage practices and this would never have happened.

      No, if there were legal ecstacy tabs that came with a safety information sheet, users would ignore the safety info and continue to do stupid shit. I mean, hell, twenty years of putting warning labels on cigarette packs detailing the health risks of smoking, and PEOPLE STILL SMOKE.

    27. Re:Dihydrogen Monoxide *is* dangerous by TGK · · Score: 1

      Replace "bread" with "malto-glutenous human food product" and this would be a hell of a lot more effective.

      Hell, replace it with "gluten varient ribonucleic acid" and you can probably get it banned nationaly before anyone works out that you're talking about the primary protein in all grains.

      --
      Killfile(TGK)
      No trees were killed in the creation of this post. However, many electrons were inconvenienced.
    28. Re:Dihydrogen Monoxide *is* dangerous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      While we're banning dangerous substances, let's not forget oxygen. As we know, most people become addicted to oxygen at birth and the withdrawal symptoms are fatal.

    29. Re:Dihydrogen Monoxide *is* dangerous by pclminion · · Score: 1

      Oxygen is also a critical element in causing forest fires! Save the trees! Ban oxygen!

    30. Re:Dihydrogen Monoxide *is* dangerous by Jon+Abbott · · Score: 1

      This must be why the Atkins diet is so popular nowadays... :^)

    31. Re:Dihydrogen Monoxide *is* dangerous by alienw · · Score: 1

      I highly doubt that drinking several liters of water would kill you. You would be very hard-pressed to drink that much, anyway. I think the ecstasy was the more likely cause. It's like saying that someone died from eating a sandwich because they were eating one when they got run over by a car.

    32. Re:Dihydrogen Monoxide *is* dangerous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Oxygen is also a critical element in causing forest fires! Save the trees! Ban oxygen! "

      Not only that but some forests rely on fire to create their next generation of trees. I say we ban forests altogether!

    33. Re:Dihydrogen Monoxide *is* dangerous by ajs318 · · Score: 1

      Read the articles I was linking to -- it's safer than drinking that much water to find out. Also you've got to remember that she was probably a bit sodium-deficient anyway thanks to a trend against eating salt, in fact against eating anything, going around young women.

      I've suffered a much milder form of the same thing myself, once. I did have a bit of amphetamine in my system, but that isn't the point: it was 31 degrees out, I was drinking a lot of low-mineral-content water and hadn't eaten for 24 hours. My head wasn't working, but not speed-kind not working; more like flu-kind not working. I had a raging thirst, but it seemed the more water I drank, the thirstier I got. I had to interrupt drinking to get a leak, and then I had to break off from pissing because I was thirsty.

      Now, it still would have been 31 degrees, I still wouldn't have had any appetite, and the water still would have been nearly de-min, whether or not I had taken any drugs, but News of the World readers like easy solutions, not complex logic traps. As soon as I knew what was happening to me, I realised I could never face being used on an anti-drug poster -- not even dead. I owed it to the entire legalisation movement to get better, and quickly. I dissolved a teaspoonful of salt and a tablespoon of sugar in a glass of water. "This is either going to kill me or cure me," I said, in an attempt at some Famous Last Words; then I downed the strange-tasting mixture.

      What can I say? I got better. Quickly. It cooled off that evening, and I got some proper food down me.

      --
      Je fume. Tu fumes. Nous fûmes!
  7. Brilliant, for a multiple-year-old gag by Epyn · · Score: 1

    Yeah, next they'll be installing dark suckers on all the street light posts.

  8. Wow by mdarksbane · · Score: 4, Funny

    I hope no one tells them about the Pacific. We could be in serious trouble.

    1. Re:Wow by u-235-sentinel · · Score: 2, Funny

      hehehe...

      No kidding. I guess it's to their credit they discovered the truth before banning the stuff. Would be pretty bad had they voted yes to ban it then discovered they had to go through all the trouble of overturning it :-)

      --
      Has Comcast disconnected your Internet account? Same here. You can read about it at http://comcastissue.blogspot.com
    2. Re:Wow by slashdot_commentator · · Score: 1
      I hope no one tells them about the Pacific. We could be in serious trouble.

      Oh, the Pacific poses less of a threat, because its treated with sodium chloride. Still, it is known to be a hazardous substance, and you wouldn't want to drink a lot of it. (Too much of anything will kill you...)

      --
      There is no America. There is no democracy. There is only IBM and AT&T and DuPont, Dow, General Electric, and Exxon
  9. This stuff is nothing...l by BigForbis · · Score: 4, Funny

    Dihydrogen Monoxide is nothing. It's not very dangerous. The real kill is the Hydrogen Hydroxide. Closely related but much more dangerous. We should ban it first.

    --
    Remember, 50% of people are below average...
    1. Re:This stuff is nothing...l by Mateito · · Score: 3, Funny

      Yeah.. get enough Hydrogen Hydroxide together and you end up with a shit load of H+ and OH- ions... effectively like burning yourself with acid then pouring bleach over the wound.

    2. Re:This stuff is nothing...l by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... without the heat and explosion.

    3. Re:This stuff is nothing...l by red+floyd · · Score: 1

      And what about Oxygen Dihidryide?

      --
      The only reason we have the rights we have is that people just like us died to gain those rights. -- Cheerio Boy
    4. Re:This stuff is nothing...l by sketerpot · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't the OH- and H+ ions combine to form Hydrogen (I) Oxide?

    5. Re:This stuff is nothing...l by zhenlin · · Score: 1

      Introducing...
      The Hydrogen Hydroxide Alkali!
      Chemical composition: H(OH)
      Strength remains constant when mixed with water!

      Introducing...
      The Hydroxyl Acid!
      Chemical composition: H(OH)
      Is not diluted by water!

      Introducing...
      The Hydrogen Hydroxide Salt!
      Chemical composition: H(OH)
      Dissolves perfectly in water!

    6. Re:This stuff is nothing...l by Inebrius · · Score: 1

      "Remember, 50% of people are below average... "

      This reminds me of a radio commercial I hear trying to encourage young people to finish high school.

      where "Those who graduate high school, on average, earn 40% more than non-high school graduates. Some earn even more."

      I wonder if all these dumbed down anti-drug, pro high school graduate, get help for your baby, etc. ads seem condescending to me because I am not their target audience.

      OTOH, I sometimes feel that they would have the opposite effect if I was still in my teens (don't smoke or you'll die a horrible death, get cancer, and you support terrorism). Now, they just plain annoy me.

    7. Re:This stuff is nothing...l by Man+of+E · · Score: 1
      Remember, 50% of people are below average...

      Only if the mean is equal to the median. Another way to lie with stats :-)

      --
      Ceci n'est pas une sig
    8. Re:This stuff is nothing...l by Tackhead · · Score: 1
      > I wonder if all these dumbed down anti-drug, pro high school graduate, get help for your baby, etc. ads seem condescending to me because I am not their target audience.

      Yeah, but watching the ads and thinking about the target audience -- man, that's the best motivator to go to school and get good grades that was ever invented.

      "Hi. I'm a fucking moron. See the kid I just shat out? It's going to be a retard, and it's going to cost the taxpayers tens of thousands of dollars a year. You're all going to pay for it. But the only thing worse than being one of the suckers who has to pay for it is being a broke-ass drunk welfare bum like me. So get your fucking ass to school, or end up in poverty, and end up so stupid you'll think these ads are effective.

      Fear of poverty. My anti-drug."

    9. Re:This stuff is nothing...l by DunbarTheInept · · Score: 1

      Technically that "some earn even more" does add a miniscule amount of additional information and is thus not entirely redundant. If the average of something is X, that could be because some things are above X and some are below, OR it could be because absolutely everything in the set is exactly X, no more, no less. Saying "some earn even more" does in fact add information by ruling out that possiblity. (Although anyone dumb enough to think that every high school graduate earns the same amount of money has a different kind of problem.)

      --

      Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.

    10. Re:This stuff is nothing...l by Myridon · · Score: 1

      0 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 10
      Mean = Median = 5
      Yet only 10% "below average"!

    11. Re:This stuff is nothing...l by Mateito · · Score: 1

      > Wouldn't the OH- and H+ ions combine to form
      > Hydrogen (I) Oxide?

      No. It would be Hydrogren (I) Hydroxide. Not too sure about the (I).. Hydrogen has a fairly limited set of ion states.

      In all seriousness, the attraction bewteen H+ and OH- ions to form the water we all know and love is exactly the reason that a base nuetralizes an acid.

    12. Re:This stuff is nothing...l by localhost00 · · Score: 1
      "Hydrogen (I) Oxide" is a naming convention for ionic compounds. It is also incorrect because roman numerals are only used for transition metals since they are capable of carrying varying charges.

      Also, it is actually H30+ + OH- --> 2H2O. It's not a hydrogen ion but rather a hydronium ion. Hydrogen will NOT give up its lone electron.

      --

      Calling atheism and agnosticism a religion is like calling bald a hair color.

    13. Re:This stuff is nothing...l by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Remember, 50% of people are below average... "

      Actually, 50% of people are not necessarily below average. 50% of people are below median, though.

    14. Re:This stuff is nothing...l by sketerpot · · Score: 1

      Ah, I had wondered about that. Thanks for setting me straight. :-)

    15. Re:This stuff is nothing...l by Overzeetop · · Score: 1

      There is a billboard in Blacksburg, Virginia what states the 70% of the high shcool students at (Blacksburg High, IIRC) have more fun when they party without alcohol. I've paraphrased from my (poor) memory, VT folks who might want to go see take 460 and turn onto North Main, back into town...it's on the left.

      I always thought that that was a bit bad a stat to use, as it implies that 30% of the local high school students prefer to drink when they party.

      --
      Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
  10. gotta love statistics by dannobookem · · Score: 1

    I bet they could put together some scary numbers from statistics about drowning.

    --
    Everytime megaman walks, does it count as another "Million Man March"?
    1. Re:gotta love statistics by x0n · · Score: 1


      You can't trust those statisticians though; 76% of statistics are just made up on the spot.

      - Ois

      --

      PGP KeyId: 0x08D63965
    2. Re:gotta love statistics by eljasbo · · Score: 1

      Actually its 76.43%. If you add a decimal point it greatly increases the accuracy of all made up statistics.

  11. It MUST be true! by pablo_max · · Score: 5, Funny

    In my experience they dont allow things on the internet that are not true. Case in point I will be getting a check from Bill Gates real soon as I have done my part and forwarded his email.

    1. Re:It MUST be true! by onyxruby · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The beauty of this site and the others that perpetuate this is that it is 100% factual. Exposed inhalation will kill you, you'll drown. It is a critical ingredient in acid rain, it does react explosively with certain chemicals etc.

      Its designed to catch people with knee jerk reactions that cant be bothered to do even a brief investigation of the facts. Its a way of showing the people that are always claiming the sky is falling for the fools that they are.

    2. Re:It MUST be true! by jazmataz23 · · Score: 1

      Yes, this demonstrates that facts can be manipulated to make a point, ergo ALL facts have a political leaning! The measurable climate change is therefore just a deliberate misrepresentation of the anticorporate Universities and can safely be ignored! Thank goodness!

      --
      Death to Argument by Slogan!! (This post twice-encrypted with ROT-13. Replies not using same will be ignored)
    3. Re:It MUST be true! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What I want to know is.. what the hell is the Dept. of Chemistry and biochem, University of Notre Dame, and the other notable sources smoking?

      Do these people even know that their names are being used in one big joke? Do these people even really exist? I smell fraud.

      General Chemistry class
      Dept. of Chemistry & Biochemistry
      University of Notre Dame
      South Bend, Indiana
      Researchers:
      Jerry T. Godbout, Ph.D.
      Steve Carroll

    4. Re:It MUST be true! by balubk · · Score: 1

      In my experience they dont allow things on the internet that are not true
      Yeah.. its on google too! so it must be true!

    5. Re:It MUST be true! by onyxruby · · Score: 4, Informative

      http://www.zippynet.com/pages/bandhmo.htm

      I believe this is the original. The page slashdot linked to is just someone rehashing the idea and putting up a different take on it. The person running the link I provided claims to have had their page up for a decade and on gopher for several years before that. So yes, you could say fraud for the slashdot linked website, but the original is 100% factual, and I give them the credit.

    6. Re:It MUST be true! by mog007 · · Score: 1

      Actully the sky isn't falling, it's FLYING INTO SPACE! We have to hurry up and ship more mass to Earth before we lose our ENTIRE atmosphere!

    7. Re:It MUST be true! by onyxruby · · Score: 1

      Interesting point. We do of course lose bits of our atmoshere into space. We also gain bits of mass everyday from small meteorites that constantly impact the planet. I wonder if we lose total planetary mass or gain it in an average year? Any astronomers know this one?

      I'm pretty certain the planet will be eaten by the sun before we lose our atmosphere though - so nothing to worry about :)

    8. Re:It MUST be true! by dubiousmike · · Score: 1

      the domain name for the one linked to by slashdot has a private domain name registration. While it is possible this was done this way so that any teachers or students who would actually think to check who the owner is could not figure out the joke, it could also be there so that whomever is ripping off the idea can not be called out easily.

    9. Re:It MUST be true! by zapp · · Score: 1

      he person running the link I provided claims to have had their page up for a decade

      Given the nature of the site, I don't know if I'm inclined to believe their claim ;)

      Also, Here's your URL, linkafied: http://www.zippynet.com/pages/bandhmo.htm

      --
      no comment
    10. Re:It MUST be true! by pballsim · · Score: 1

      I've been saying this for years!

      A high school student, I believe in Idaho, won a science fair contest 6 years ago (I was in high school physics). I showed my teacher the original and he laughed - proving the person won a contest by copying somebody else's work.

      This is the oldest story and other cities have been doing this. Just like everything, there isn't any creativity (only like .0001%). People just rehash somebody's else work.

    11. Re:It MUST be true! by georgewilliamherbert · · Score: 2, Informative
      http://www.zippynet.com/pages/bandhmo.htm
      I believe this is the original.

      Bzzt. The original site is:
      http://www.circus.com/~no_dhmo/index.html

      The joke was originally come up with by two UC Santa Cruz students, Eric Lechner and Lars Norpchen, in the spring of 1988, while they were residents at the Santa Cruz Geek House The House.

      The Circus page links to the organization's leadership, who were many of the various people who helped elaborate on it (about half of it is original to Eric and Lars prior to anyone else contributing).

      The joke is now roughly old enough to get a drivers license in California.

      One of the problems is that this has circulated so widely without attribution that people tend to believe that it has no copyright or attributable origin. But that's not true; Eric and Lars came up with the idea. They're the ones that sat up on campus at UC Santa Cruz handing out fliers with the info on it, to see how people reacted.

      -george william herbert
      Treasurer, Coalition to Ban DHMO

    12. Re:It MUST be true! by onyxruby · · Score: 1

      I'm certainly not claiming to have originated it myself, so I can't substantiate the claim of the site I linked. Would you happen to have a copy of one of those old fliers laying around? I would love to see it. If they were the ones that originaly came up with it, than props to them, they did an incredible job.

    13. Re:It MUST be true! by jc42 · · Score: 1

      I've seen a couple of articles on the topic. The conclusions were that the Earth gains mass slowly. But the amount is so small that it will probably be a fraction of a percent over the remaining lifetime of the planet. It may be somewhat more significant than it seems, though, since what is lost is mostly light atoms, i.e., our atmosphere and water. But still, it's not really significant.

      The numbers have large error bars, partly because they're dependent on what sort of interstellar junk we're passing through. Right now, we're in a large "bubble" of low density, so what's being added to the Earth is close to a minimum. Come back in a few million years, and we may be in a denser cloud. But accretion to the planet will still be rather insignificant. (Unless one of the big rocks comes our way. ;-)

      Some astronomers have studied the Earth's "dust tail", partly because it interferes with some kinds of observations due to the light that it scatters. The most interesting conclusion is that the dust tail includes particles as large as bacterial spores, and such spores are known to be present in the upper atmosphere. Tests have shown that they can survive long periods in space. So it's easy to answer the question "Is there life on other planets?" The answer is "Yes, and they came from Earth."

      Whether any of them can survive and grow on the other planets is unknown. But the Earth has been spraying the outer planets with bacterial spores for several billion years. The solar wind also eventually blows them out of the solar system, so we've been contaminating the rest of the galaxy, too.

      The general term for this process is "panspermia". Ask google about it. It's all very hypothetical, of course. But it's interesting to consider. Maybe not all that interesting, since we can't collect much data on the topic (yet).

      --
      Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
    14. Re:It MUST be true! by onyxruby · · Score: 1

      Interesting, thank you. I recall hearing about unintended bacterial growth when NASA picked up something left behind (camera?) on a previous moon mission. If such contamination has occured, which I think sounds plausible, than would we be able to trace it to Earth?

    15. Re:It MUST be true! by Larzarus · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      George is correct...Eric and I wrote one version in 1989 at UCSC as a spoof of all the knee-jerk environmental activism, we printed up a slew of these flyers and spread them all over campus. (specifically, the Styrofoam reference is in response to the successful campus-wide student campaign to ban Styrofoam from our dorm cafeterias) Craig then edited it and massaged the text for HTML in around 1992 or so (the link george gives above) Obviously not the only time this idea has been thought of, but ours was an "independent invention" for us and our particular copy has been circulated as email spam, printed in Chemical Engineering News, Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, etc. (the latter two with our permission) and seems to have a life of it's own. Eric posted the original text here: to rec.humor.funny back in 1990

    16. Re:It MUST be true! by Larzarus · · Score: 1

      actually, I'm not 100% sure if it was 1988 or 1989 at this point!

    17. Re:It MUST be true! by jc42 · · Score: 1

      Whether bacteria in the rest of the Solar System can be traced to Earth is a bit tricky. If they can be identified as close relatives of Earthly bacteria, the conclusion is obvious. But since the other planets, comets, etc. don't have very Earth-like conditions, we would expect that anything actually living elsewhere would rapidly diverge from any Earth relatives. We then have the problem of whether their ancestors came from Earth, or from outside the Solar System.

      And the "panspermia" hypothesis suggests the latter. The galaxy is roughly three times older than the Earth, so if life evolved on Earth, it had three times as long to evolve elsewhere. Those places have also been spraying their bacterial spores (thinly) across the galaxy. The idea then is that life may not have originated on Earth at all, but may have come here in the form of bacterial spores. They were in the cloud that condensed to form the Solar System, the proto-Earth had lots of them, and those that didn't get baked in the interior of the forming planet were the ancestors of our current biosphere.

      Getting evidence one way or the other is not easy. Conclusive evidence will probably have to wait until we can collect enough samples of dust that's crossing the Solar System at speeds too great to be in orit about the Sun. Then, if the panspermia idea is correct, we'd predict that some tiny fraction of these dust particles will be (or contain) bacterial spores.

      If we can take those spores apart and study their biochemistry, we may find some that are unlike anything on Earth. That would strongly support the hypothesis. Our kind of life evolved somewhere (maybe Earth, maybe not), other kinds evolved other places, and they're all drifting around just a-lookin' for a home.

      On the other hand, if they are all based on the same RNA/DNA/amino-acid units as Earth life, things get trickier. Maybe there was only one origin of life in the galaxy. Maybe there's only one way that life can work. Maybe the Earth is the only planet with life, and we've picked up our own ancient bacteria on their tour of the galaxy.

      Or maybe we won't find any viable spores on the extra-system dust particles, but a few or a lot of dead spore fragments. This would mean that they really can't survive millennia in space, and panspermia doesn't work.

      It's going to be a while before we can collect the evidence.

      --
      Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
    18. Re:It MUST be true! by onyxruby · · Score: 1

      Thanks for answering. For whatever its worth you guys did an excellent job. Please understand my original grandfather post was an attempt to give proper credit, I certainly wouldn't try to give credit to the wrong party. I checked out your link, that is helpful.

      I've had some stuff plagarized over the years as well, so I understand wanting credit. Just curious, did you guys only do your original version you supplied the link to, or have you occasionaly updated it? I'm thinking of something along the lines of Peters evil overlord list here.

    19. Re:It MUST be true! by Larzarus · · Score: 1

      The joke's been done independently countless times. We think it's kinda funny that our particular incarnation keeps showing up, and apparently still fools people 15 years later. Certainly we can't claim we ORIGINATED the idea for joke by any means, it's an old old idea. Just that we happened to have written that one particular version that keeps circulating, and that it was an independent invention for us at the time.

      The version eric posted to rec.humor.funny in 1990 is the original text as it appeared on the UCSC flyer in 1988 or 89, at least as far as either of us remember. We wrote that off the top of our heads mostly, I don't think we even pulled out the textbooks. We haven't updated it since. We actually mostly forgot about it, but the rest of "the coaltition to ban dhmo" picked up the ball and put it up on the web and continued carrying the torch, etc. We're glad they've kept the joke alive long after Eric and I forgot about it...

      Personally I've gone on to other stupid-web-joke-memes like the (blatant plug) Furby Autopsy and Yeti@home ...

      Larz

  12. OT: Ruled by Stupid Fsck by Lead+Butthead · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    What become laws has everything to do with who's ear you got and nothing to do with facts. Ahhh the beauty of American democracy.

    --
    ELOI, ELOI, LAMA SABACHTHANI!?
    1. Re:OT: Ruled by Stupid Fsck by NemosomeN · · Score: 1

      What become laws has everything to do with who's ear you got and nothing to do with facts. Ahhh the beauty of American democracy. How the hell is that offtopic? It's the whole underlying reason this article made it on slashdot... (Maybe could have been a YRO article, message: If there's a retard in your jurisdiction you're fucked.) I should also note that today, the word "if" has been changed to mean "because."

      --
      I hate grammar Nazi's.
  13. Why does this surprise me it is in California? by eljasbo · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Come on people. This is the state that wanted to make oreo cookies an age restrictred item, and the state that required electronic equipment not to use the master/slave nomenclature because it offended only one person. Obviously they did zero research on this before they had their knee-jerk reaction. I bet we will soon see warnings on bottled water like we do some other items... "This product is known to the state of California to cause an unknown disease.." Remind me never to live there.

    1. Re:Why does this surprise me it is in California? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > This is the state

      with one wacko legislator

      > that wanted to make oreo cookies an age restrictred item, and the state

      with one wacko town

      > that required electronic equipment not to use the master/slave nomenclature because it offended only one person

      > Remind me never to live there.

      That's fine, we don't want you.

    2. Re:Why does this surprise me it is in California? by falcon5768 · · Score: 1

      Dude, just shut up now... when you live in a state that finally makes my homestate of NJ look good... you have problems

      --

      "Slashdot, where telling the truth is overrated but lying is insightful."

    3. Re:Why does this surprise me it is in California? by onyxruby · · Score: 4, Funny

      Reminds me of an oxygen canister I saw at home depot a little bit ago. It carried a warning label on it stating that oxygen was known to cause cancer in the state of california. This label was about as big as the one letting you know that it was flammable.

    4. Re:Why does this surprise me it is in California? by Mad_Rain · · Score: 5, Funny

      Reminds me of the advice of one of my professors - "Live on the East Coast for a while, but be prepared to leave, because for every year you live out there, you get more cynical. Live on the West Coast for a while, but be prepared to leave, because for every year you live out there, you lose an IQ point."

      --
      "What do you think?" "I think 'What, do you think?!'"
    5. Re:Why does this surprise me it is in California? by whiteranger99x · · Score: 4, Funny

      Ah quit your bitching! As a Californian speaking, I'm proud to say that our state will literally break off from the rest of the US anyway....maybe to hang out with Hawaii. Alaska can come too.

      --
      Join the TWIT army now!
    6. Re:Why does this surprise me it is in California? by LostCluster · · Score: 2, Funny

      Obviously they did zero research on this before they had their knee-jerk reaction.

      No, they did bad research. This is like quoting a piece in The Onion as having come from "America's Finest News Soure" in a research paper.

      Not everything on the Internet is true, and not everything that looks like research or news is really ture. There's a sucker born every minute...

    7. Re:Why does this surprise me it is in California? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      does it cause cancer anywhere else in the world?

    8. Re:Why does this surprise me it is in California? by Radius9 · · Score: 1

      Ummm, I have to disagree with you here. Having lived in California in the past and having lived in New Jersey for the last 6 months, there's not much that will make New Jersey look good. New Jersey had "Green Rabbits" for Christ's sake.

    9. Re:Why does this surprise me it is in California? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny
      Oxygen causes cancer in California?

      There's another good reason not to go there.

    10. Re:Why does this surprise me it is in California? by _marshall · · Score: 5, Informative

      This is obviously a blatant attempt at california(n) flamage, but...

      With a small amount of research I'm sure you can pull up stupid laws and occurences for just about every state in the union. You want to know why people love california? Let me list some reasons without trying to sound like a tourist commercial:
      - Extremely varying climates all within a relatively small area (i.e. Desert, Beach, Mountains all within a hour or so of each other)
      - Strong cultural heritage throughout the state
      - Southern california has some of the best weather in the US, bar-none.
      - Napa Valley, Big Bear, Hollywood, Alcatraz, Catalina Island, Sea World, just to name a few

      If you're looking for real reasons not to move to California, I can give you those too:
      - Everything is expensive
      - California traffic has been compared to a day in hell
      - major metropolitan areas are very crowded.
      - no smoking in bars or restaurants (seriously)

      Obviously they did zero research on this before they had their knee-jerk reaction
      I think the irony in that statement has been accurately summed up =)

    11. Re:Why does this surprise me it is in California? by Phurd+Phlegm · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Reminds me of an oxygen canister I saw at home depot a little bit ago. [...] This label was about as big as the one letting you know that it was flammable.

      Of course, oxygen isn't flammable. Was that supposed to be part of the humorous part, too, or did it really say that?

    12. Re:Why does this surprise me it is in California? by falcon5768 · · Score: 1

      maybe 10 years ago... its gotten much better.... besides eveyone knowns the air sucks thanks to NY

      --

      "Slashdot, where telling the truth is overrated but lying is insightful."

    13. Re:Why does this surprise me it is in California? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, DOH, Oxygen *DOES* cause cancer. Sometimes in cells oxygen molecules "go postal" (become free radicals).
      It's the cells' own fault for trying to mess with such high energy molecules. :-P

      oxygen causes cancer,
      so a radical solution
      is to simply stop breathing.

    14. Re:Why does this surprise me it is in California? by cavebear42 · · Score: 1

      Make fun all you want, but make sure you button that coat. Anyways, enough /. for today, its off to the beach for me.

    15. Re:Why does this surprise me it is in California? by dknj · · Score: 1

      - no smoking in bars or restaurants (seriously)

      Same in NYC. I recently went to some clubs up there a few months ago, and the smoking ban is great. I hate leaving clubs smelling like smoke because someone couldn't put their nicotine fix on hold. On the otherhand, restaurants i think may be overkill since you can effectively seperate smokers and nonsmokers if the restaurant is large enough. Oh well, i'm still happy :)

      -dk

    16. Re:Why does this surprise me it is in California? by cavebear42 · · Score: 1

      Open the tank and light a match then tell me again how it's not flammable.

    17. Re:Why does this surprise me it is in California? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm guessing it wasn't a tank of O2, it had to be one of the many chemicals which can release oxygen under the right conditions. Chances are, that chemical was the carcinogen. Sorry to buzz-kill....

    18. Re:Why does this surprise me it is in California? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Reminds me of an oxygen canister I saw at home
      > depot a little bit ago.

      Please don't smoke in here - oxygen in use ...

    19. Re:Why does this surprise me it is in California? by SiMac · · Score: 4, Informative

      Technically, the oxygen itself isn't flammable, the match is. The definition of flammable is that something readily combines with oxygen in an exothermic reaction producing fire. Oxygen does not combine with oxygen, but when more oxygen is present, it does have a tendency to increase the strength of a fire as the reactant is more readily available.

    20. Re:Why does this surprise me it is in California? by _marshall · · Score: 1

      I personally agree with the smoking ban as well.. even though I'm an ex-smoker. I currently live in texas and i swear you can't go to a public place with more than 10 people inside without coming out smelling like smoke... Pool halls are the worst =P

    21. Re:Why does this surprise me it is in California? by aiabx · · Score: 1

      It's the match that's flammable. Explosively so in the presence of pure oxygen.
      -aiabx

      --
      Just this guy, you know?
    22. Re:Why does this surprise me it is in California? by pjt33 · · Score: 1

      You mean there are better American news sources than the Onion?

    23. Re:Why does this surprise me it is in California? by onyxruby · · Score: 1

      It was a tank of 100% oxygen. I might have the exact nature of the flammable warning off, but the cancer warning was about the same size.

    24. Re:Why does this surprise me it is in California? by cavebear42 · · Score: 1

      You got the positives right. Im from Nor Cal and now live in LA county, the grography and weather are the best in the nation, possibly the world. Temp swings of 50 degrees F from a hot summer day to a cold winter one. We keep the snow in the mountians, where it belongs. I can be from a warm 80 degree F beach to snowboarding in under 2 hours. We, without the reset of the US, have the worlds 7th largest enconomy, we feed pretty much the entire world.

      About your negatives:
      Everything expensive: really only in OC, LA, and Bay, remember that this is less than 10% of the state. The desert (only 1 hour from LA) and the central valley (an hour from the bay) are still pretty cheap. Up past sacramento, land is practilly free.

      CA traffic: We also have the best freeway system in the nation, and we did it without turnpikes. THe bad commutes are into LA and into silicone valley. Other than that, its not that bad. (and i worked as a on-site computer tech in LA for 3 years.

      Major metro areas: What do you define as a major metro area? If you answer a place that is really crowded.... umm OK.

      No smoking in public areas: This is bad?

      Not wanting him here. If we are voting on this (which californian's like to do, being the nations only direct democrocy) I will cast mine against him also. Let him freeze, its expected to break 100 again today. (3/16/04)

    25. Re:Why does this surprise me it is in California? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's another good reason not to go there.

      Excellent. Our plan is working.

    26. Re:Why does this surprise me it is in California? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Oxygen does not combine with oxygen
      Somebody better tell all those breathable oxygen (O2) and ozone (O3) molecules then...

      And before you all go getting all in a huff, this post is a joke!
    27. Re:Why does this surprise me it is in California? by king-manic · · Score: 1

      Wait a minute why is
      "- no smoking in bars or restaurants (seriously)"
      a bad thing. It's a incredibly bad habbit of a small minority of Americans/Candians. Anythign we can do to discourage it helps people live longer.
      less than 1/4 of the US/Canadian population smoke.

      Why shoudl the other 75%-85% bend over to accomadate a few addicts.

      --
      "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
    28. Re:Why does this surprise me it is in California? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also note that California is the most populous state. This could explain why so many so many stupid people seem to live there: because more people live there in general.

      Yes, this statistical truism should be as clear as "dihydrogen monoxide", but notice how many California-bashers are only talking about the number of stupid things they've heard about ("they did this, that, and the other thing), not the ratio of stupid things to people or any other more logical comparison. Yet more wonderful irony!

    29. Re:Why does this surprise me it is in California? by ajs318 · · Score: 1

      Oxygen is not flammable. It is an oxidising agent, which might induce spontaneous combustion in nearby flammable substances.

      --
      Je fume. Tu fumes. Nous fûmes!
    30. Re:Why does this surprise me it is in California? by onyxruby · · Score: 1

      Since the point was brought up, I checked the MSDS and verified that indeed pure oxygen isn't flammable. It is of course required for flame, and things burn better when their is a higher concentration of oxygen available.

      My point was about the cancer label on pure oxygen. I just recalled some kind of flammable warning of about the same size on the container. If you really wanted to check it out, just stop by Home depot, I'm sure they still sell the same brand.

    31. Re:Why does this surprise me it is in California? by ajs318 · · Score: 1

      If I own a bar, club or restaurant, it is my property. If people want to smoke in there, then it is a matter between them and me and no-one else -- certainly not the government. If I choose not to allow people to smoke in there then that is my decision. If I choose to allow people to smoke in there, then that is my decision also. If people refuse to come in because I allow others to smoke in there, then that is their decision. If people choose to come in, knowing that smoking is permitted, then that is their decision -- and they take full responsibility for the consequences.

      The only person who doesn't get to make a decision for themself in the whole thing is the smoker, who is chemically adicted to the poisonous drug nicotine and will get sick without it.

      --
      Je fume. Tu fumes. Nous fûmes!
    32. Re:Why does this surprise me it is in California? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your professor stole that from the sunscreen song. What else did he "teach" you?

    33. Re:Why does this surprise me it is in California? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Come on republicans, lets spread more urban legends about california! you should live in california for a while, it might mellow you out.

    34. Re:Why does this surprise me it is in California? by MonkeyCookie · · Score: 1

      That movie was hilarious! It's a must-see.

    35. Re:Why does this surprise me it is in California? by Dr_Makarov · · Score: 1

      Oxygen is rather nasty stuff and we are fortunate that it is diluted in a lot of nitrogen. It isn't flamable, but it can cause convulsions and central nervous system problems at partial pressures above 2 atm. Even at 1 atm, it can irritate the bronchial tubes. Chronic irritation could, in theory, cause cancer. As ozone (O3) it causes oxidative damage to cell components, which has been implicated as a cause of cancer. If you think O3 is stretching the definition of oxygen, the O2 molecule has an excited state that can't readily relax back to the ground state, and the excited (singlet) state also readily attacks cell components, possibly inducing cancer. To be sure, oxygen is a low risk (especially considering the risks of not using it) , but depending on how CA sets the bar for warnings, it might be justified

    36. Re:Why does this surprise me it is in California? by ajnlth · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Yes, just as corporations that work with dangerous chemicals shouldn't have to provide protective gear for their employes. I mean, they don't have to work there right?

      (just as waiters that don't have to work somewhere where they are subject to passive smoking, and the problems it's known to cause)

    37. Re:Why does this surprise me it is in California? by cavebear42 · · Score: 1

      ok, lets try this again. you take an oxygen tank, just some goold old 2O2, you open that sumabich up and stike a match, some flint, whatever, you touch a 9volt to some steal wool, you put it close to that escaping gas, the little fire starts. next, you remove this match, spark, or whatever. Does the fire go out? Come on, dont do a 'thought experiment', go try it. OK, you're back. Good now we know that the fire did not go out. So was it the match still burning? You douse the match in water 10 feet away yet the fire continues. This sounds to me like a flammable ("Easily ignited and capable of burning rapidly") material. Its funny to me that if you replaced all the Oxygens in this statement with another gas, say Hydrogen, and preformed the same experiment, you wouldn't have seen the complaints.

    38. Re:Why does this surprise me it is in California? by kiwimate · · Score: 1

      Totally o/t, but back in the 70s a large number of New Zealanders were emigrating to Australia. The Prime Minister of New Zealand at the time, Rob Muldoon, commented that the New Zealanders who were participating in this migration pattern were effectively raising the average IQ levels of both countries.

    39. Re:Why does this surprise me it is in California? by radish · · Score: 1

      That's because hydrogen burns. Oxygen doesn't. The definition of "burn" is "combining with oxygen and giving off heat" (in simple terms) - oxygen doesn't combine with oxygen, and thus, it doesn't burn. To put it another way, you need 3 things for a flame to exist. Fuel, oxygen, and heat. Take away any of those 3 and the flame goes out. So in your example with the match and the 02 cannister, once the match is completely gone, there is no fuel, and the flame will stop burning. I'm in an office so I can't try it right now, but I'd stake a lot of cash on that being the result.

      --

      ---- Den ene knappen er powerknapp, den andre er Bender voice knapp "Bite My Shiny Metal Ass"

    40. Re:Why does this surprise me it is in California? by Tackhead · · Score: 1
      > Reminds me of an oxygen canister I saw at home depot a little bit ago. It carried a warning label on it stating that oxygen was known to cause cancer in the state of california. This label was about as big as the one letting you know that it was flammable.

      "For users in the State of California, USA.

      Place the following sticker in a blank area of the product manual.

      WARNING: Handling the cord on this product will expose you to lead, a chemical known to the State of California to cause birth defects or other reproductive harm. Wash hands after handling."

      From an actual sticker included with purchase of a piece of hardware that included an AC adaptor and a power cord. CA also got snookered by the lead-pthalate pseudoscientists, whose claims are almost as baseless as the ones on DHMO.org.

    41. Re:Why does this surprise me it is in California? by DunbarTheInept · · Score: 1

      So, it's only dangerous if you live in California, then?

      --

      Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.

    42. Re:Why does this surprise me it is in California? by cr0sh · · Score: 2

      They don't have to - what ever happened to voting with one's feet or wallet (ie, for the thick skulled - if you don't like something going on inside - GO SOMEWHERE ELSE)?

      --
      Reason is the Path to God - Anon
    43. Re:Why does this surprise me it is in California? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      CA traffic: We also have the best freeway system in the nation, and we did it without turnpikes. THe bad commutes are into LA and into silicone valley. Other than that, its not that bad. (and i worked as a on-site computer tech in LA for 3 years.

      How long ago were you here? I've noticed traffic has gotten much worse in the past 4 or 5 years. You can't even count on saturdays to be traffic free anymore.
    44. Re:Why does this surprise me it is in California? by DunbarTheInept · · Score: 1

      The 'flammable' label is actually just as stupid, given how fire actually works. Oxygen isn't flammable at all. Yeah, it's dangerous, and having more of it present makes fire more likely, but it's not what's catching on fire. It's what makes it possible for everything else that is flammable to be flammable.

      For example, iron is almost always on fire here on
      earth. It's a very slow process, but eventually it does finish, and the 'ash' left behind is called rust.

      --

      Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.

    45. Re:Why does this surprise me it is in California? by DunbarTheInept · · Score: 1

      "Flammable" means "combines with oxygen exothermically". Oxygen, touching more oxygen, doesn't do a damn thing by itself, otherwise the atmosphere would be constantly on fire.

      Oxygen is what causes everything *ELSE* to be flammable.

      Replace oxygen with any other thing and that won't be true.

      --

      Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.

    46. Re:Why does this surprise me it is in California? by Idarubicin · · Score: 2, Informative
      ok, lets try this again. you take an oxygen tank, just some goold old 2O2, you open that sumabich up and stike a match, some flint, whatever, you touch a 9volt to some steal wool, you put it close to that escaping gas, the little fire starts. next, you remove this match, spark, or whatever. Does the fire go out? Come on, dont do a 'thought experiment', go try it.

      I'd recommend strongly against doing this experiment. A lit match (or just about anything else hot) will burn explosively in one atmosphere of pure oxygen. Metals will burn in an oxygen atmosphere. You'll be lucky to get your hand back if you try what the parent post suggests.

      That said, if you do manage to remove the fuel (match, whatever) from the oxygen jet, you'll find that the match will continue to burn but there will be no flame from the oxygen.

      Oxygen doesn't burn. It is the oxidizer which when combined with a fuel allows combustion to take place.

      Is there anybody in our audience who does oxy-acetylene welding, or is a professional glassblower? In both professions, you supply a torch with both a fuel gas and oxygen. Turn on both gas valves; spark to ignite. You get a nice hot flame. You can cut metal and melt glass.

      If you turn off the fuel gas, the flame goes out. No burning takes place. You get a nice, cool jet of oxygen. End of story. Energy doesn't come from nowhere--if the parent post can tell me what material in air the oxygen gas is supposed to be reacting with to generate heat and flame, I'll be pleased to retract my statement.

      By the way, IIAC (I Am A Chemist).

      Its funny to me that if you replaced all the Oxygens in this statement with another gas, say Hydrogen, and preformed the same experiment, you wouldn't have seen the complaints.

      That's because hydrogen burns. If you had made the same claims about helium, nitrogen, carbon dioxide, or argon, we'd still be arguing with you.

      --
      ~Idarubicin
    47. Re:Why does this surprise me it is in California? by ackthpt · · Score: 1
      Remind me never to live there.

      Consider yourself reminded.

      I live in California and if you think a paralegal who doesn't know the first thing about Chemistry being fooled is shocking you're pretty close minded. We can't all be experts on everything. What differentiates, IMHO, intelligent people from unintelligent is that an intelligent person seeks out advice, while an unintelligent person assumes they have all the answers. There have been some silly laws passed all around the country and outdated laws still on books.

      That said, there really are some dumb things going on in California, like an overwhelming majority electing a political novice to the governor's office. Clearly people didn't pay much attention when a similar thing happened in Minnesota not so long ago.

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    48. Re:Why does this surprise me it is in California? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, that was just one department in LA County that did so. My father works for them, and he said that the folks who raised a stink are notoriously touchy about such things. This isn't the first time that this kind of thing has been done.

      (I hate posting AC, but for my father's sake I will. I have no reason to lie on this one.)

    49. Re:Why does this surprise me it is in California? by eljasbo · · Score: 1

      You are correct. I do not expect a paralegal to know what a highschool chem student should know ( i will even ignore the city council with a phd holder on the group not knowing this fact), but why is a paralegal even making these choices? Shouldnt their job be to prepare contracts or court cases or something? The fact that a paralegal can even get involved in making choices that can affect the environmental laws and go as far as almost banning styrofoam cups based on a joke web page is crazy. Shouldnt that be the job of the California Environmental Protection Agency or some similar organization to study and assess that risk? Obviously nobody with a clue even considered consulting someone with knowledge about dihydrogen monoxide and its environmental effects. They just saw something some joker posted on the internet and assumed it was true. 5 minutes worth of research would have shown that it was a joke. The fact that this was almost made a law without any factual research truely shows how our society has been "dumbed down" and made even more gullible. I think at the next council meeting, i will introduce a revolutionary new budget plan to completely eliminate the deficit and provide projected cash surpluses for the next 10 years. All i need to do is help this guy in Nigeria get back his money that is rightfully his...

    50. Re:Why does this surprise me it is in California? by ces · · Score: 1

      That said, there really are some dumb things going on in California, like an overwhelming majority electing a political novice to the governor's office. Clearly people didn't pay much attention when a similar thing happened in Minnesota not so long ago.

      That said he seems to be less of a disaster than Grey Davis and appears to be doing a better job than I would have expected.

      On the other hand I don't live in California so I might be getting a distorted view of the situation.

      --
      Happy Fun Ball is for external use only.
    51. Re:Why does this surprise me it is in California? by DunbarTheInept · · Score: 1

      Southern california has some of the best weather in the US, bar-none.

      Unless you dislike heat and drought. Having to live through an actual winter is a small price to pay for having beautiful mild summers with actual greenery (not brownery) that naturally occurs all over, without the need for sprinklers.

      no smoking in bars or restaurants (seriously)

      Why was that lised as a bad thing? Your right to do whatever you want to your own body ends when it affects everyone else in the vacinity. If you want tobacco, go for it, but use a delivery method that doesn't affect everyone else near you. (I think those people trying to legalize marijuana would have an easier time of it if they worked just on legalizing the non-smoked methods of delivery - i.e. brownies. It's easier to argue "let the people do what they want to their own brains" when they are affecting ONLY their own brains and not those of people in the vacinity.)

      --

      Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.

    52. Re:Why does this surprise me it is in California? by JimBobJoe · · Score: 1

      With a small amount of research I'm sure you can pull up stupid laws and occurences for just about every state in the union.

      Yes, but you can pull up a lot more stupid laws for California.

      What's worse is that the consequences for such laws are often uncommonly severe. The Dead Kennedy's song "California uber alles" is a reference to California politicians and their like for making up lots of laws (I like the term "hippie fascism.")

      California legislates so much that some legal scholars have suggested that it no longer is a common law jurisdiction, and has become a quasi-civil law jurisidction (the former being the british system of law which relies a lot on judicial precedence, the latter relying more on laws codified by the legislature, eliminating judicial discretion.)

      The California political culture is to create lots of laws (and to an extent, this is the case in NJ, NY and IL.) It's hell getting bad laws repealed.

      As for California, I personally disliked Los Angeles. I'm told that California (in particular Southern California) is an acquired taste.

    53. Re:Why does this surprise me it is in California? by _marshall · · Score: 1

      I actually don't smoke myself (anymore). I grew up in Texas, where smoking is encouraged just about everywhere.. so I guess it could be Texas that is at fault here, not California. The reason I listed it as a negative was because I believe that (and I could be wrong on this one) most of the US still allows people to smoke and drink in bars.

      Even still, people that smoke do so out of choice, whether they are addicted or not. (this is coming from a 3 year smoker..) The quality (and longevity) of their lives is directly related to their choice, in my opinion.

      I do agree with your statement that common people should not have to bend over for smokers, though. My wife has extremely bad asthma reactions to cigarrette smoke, so it's really given me a whole different perspective on it.

    54. Re:Why does this surprise me it is in California? by Lifthrasir · · Score: 1

      With the oxy/acetylene, when cutting steel, you can turn off the fuel and there is still a flame, as the metal is acting as the fuel . . .

      --
      No beer, no TV make Lifthrasir something something
    55. Re:Why does this surprise me it is in California? by cavebear42 · · Score: 1

      I'm here now. I know that means very little without saying where here is but you didn't either. I grew up in Stockton (in the cenral valley), i moved to West Covina (So Cal) in 99. Took a job driving around LA, Orange, San Bernadino, and Riiverside Counties for a living in 01 and continued until last july. Most of that time i spent in the hollywood/burbank and in getting there from our industry headquarters. I now work in Pomona near the college but drive downtown frequently. It could be much better if the car companies and oil companies didn't lobby against public transportation, but its still not as bad as people think.

    56. Re:Why does this surprise me it is in California? by ackthpt · · Score: 1
      That said he seems to be less of a disaster than Grey Davis and appears to be doing a better job than I would have expected.

      On the other hand I don't live in California so I might be getting a distorted view of the situation.

      It's early yet. Even Jesse "The Mind" didn't look like a total disaster for about a year. Arnold is currently finding out he can only get what the state legislature is willing to let him have. As he ran as a GOP candidate, it's interesting that he's pissing off many of the GOP state house members while he courts the DEMs. It's an awful mess and it's not going to get better anytime soon, particularly without tax increases. California will be 46th in the nation in school spending. Don't bring your kids out here to go to school.

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    57. Re:Why does this surprise me it is in California? by ackthpt · · Score: 1
      why is a paralegal even making these choices?

      Many people are doing the work of 2, 3 or more these days in the California public arena. Low tax revenues and state funding cuts have resulted in small staffs trying to get the most done they can. That paralegal was probably working in another capacity when this came about.

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    58. Re:Why does this surprise me it is in California? by Dirtside · · Score: 1
      Yes, but you can pull up a lot more stupid laws for California.
      Keep in mind, we also have a lot more people than any other state -- about 34 million, 13 million more than the second most populous state (Texas at about 21 million). I wonder what the ratio of stupid laws to citizens is on a state-by-state basis. (Of course, I challenge you to find a definition of "stupid law" that satisfies any substantial number of people.)
      --
      "Destroy science and religion. Science would re-emerge exactly the same; but not religion." - Penn Jillette, paraphrased
    59. Re:Why does this surprise me it is in California? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I support the California Secession Movement!

    60. Re:Why does this surprise me it is in California? by barath_s · · Score: 1

      > Oxygen does not combine with oxygen Geez, I wonder how oxygen and ozone molecules are formed then ... > The definition of flammable is that something > readily combines with oxygen in an exothermic > reaction producing fire. Now free oxygen radicals combining are probably exothermic,

    61. Re:Why does this surprise me it is in California? by chthon · · Score: 1

      "California Uber Alles"

    62. Re:Why does this surprise me it is in California? by king-manic · · Score: 1

      In the vast majority of cities that allow smoking, there are few non-smoking restraunts. Thus there is no where else to go. Opening a 100% non-smoking restraunt doesn't occur to business people because they hate turnign away customers. which leaves the 75% + of us who dont' smoke choking in a Smaokers Habit. The whole notion of "vote with yrou feet and wallet" doesn't work when there are no alternatives. Just as democracy doesn't work when you're either voting "Evil" and "Somehwat different Evil".

      --
      "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
    63. Re:Why does this surprise me it is in California? by cr0sh · · Score: 1

      Imagine if those same 75% voted with their feet/wallet, and didn't go into the "smoking" restaurants/bars at all, and ate at home (or gone to the few non-smoking places)? Don't you think the business owners would then get the message?

      --
      Reason is the Path to God - Anon
    64. Re:Why does this surprise me it is in California? by king-manic · · Score: 1

      That type of vate only happens when theres a choice. When there isn't a choice, a vote cannot happen. Like I re-iterated before. Business owners are a convative lot. They don't wish to rock the boat. Thats why we have governments. To ensure that if the status quo needs changing, it changes. This libratarian attitude doesn't work.

      --
      "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
    65. Re:Why does this surprise me it is in California? by cr0sh · · Score: 1
      There is always a choice - if there weren't any non-smoking restaurants/bars, why didn't one of the non-smokers (since they are the majority, right - 75%?) open one up (if it was needed so bad in an area that had such people to serve, they would supposedly make a killing, huh - wouldn't that be prudent business sense)? Worse case scenario, they could have simply done without, and cooked, eaten, and entertained at home - rather than giving money to those places that allowed it?

      They had a choice, but rather than take it, they decided that they would rather push their "outrage" and "morals" upon the smokers, since they were in the minority.

      Just wait, alcohol very well might be next (and yeah, just because it was tried and failed miserably before, you think it won't be tried again?)...

      --
      Reason is the Path to God - Anon
    66. Re:Why does this surprise me it is in California? by king-manic · · Score: 1

      By the same argument, we non-smokers excecised our rights by supporting a ban on smoking. Thus the democratic proccess(a rather large illusion) is followed. There is no moral high ground for smokers. If they ban alchohol, thats fine with me. I dont' drink. But by and large, there are mroe drinkers then smokers. Drinking kills people other then drinkers, but there are punishments for that. Smoking kills people other then smokers. There is no punishment for that.

      --
      "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
  14. Just came in by ziggamon · · Score: 5, Funny

    Latest news: the 14-year old has just been hired by SCO as their new "information minister"

    1. Re:Just came in by rhymesmith · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No, no, no

      The website contained 100% factual information, although written in a very humorous way

      You cannot accuse SCO of doing that, more like the opposite

      This guy probably has a career in marketing ahead of him though.

  15. Worker's Comp by lukewarmfusion · · Score: 4, Funny

    I need to sue my employer now. I've been exposed to DHM for many years now, and I fear that it may be taking its toll on me. I've noticed many more wrinkles after particularly long sessions, not to mention a slickness to my skin.

    Ah, the perils of lifeguarding.

    1. Re:Worker's Comp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Hang on... lifeguarding?!

      That's a physical activity. Often done outdoors and in the sun. It does not involve a computer, or often any other technology. Sometimes women even get crushes on lifeguards.

      You must be banned from Slashdot now.

    2. Re:Worker's Comp by RabidStoat · · Score: 1

      Burn him ! Burn him now ! Someone's let in one of those "outdoor" stylee people .. don't let him touch you!

    3. Re:Worker's Comp by !3ren · · Score: 1

      I was wondering when someone would speak out about this cult of so called "Life-guards", that encourage our childrens' immersion in DHM in exchange for colored bits of fabric they call "badges".
      Earning enough "badges" would even allow a child to one day become a "Life-guard", although I shudder to think of what sort of initiation these sick and twisted individuals would perform.
      Probably ingestion of some mixture of ethanol, dihydrogen monoxide and ascorbic acid.
      Sick freaks.

  16. DHM by Anne+Thwacks · · Score: 3, Funny
    I though SCO had a patent on DHM? Then again, maybe it was IBM?

    --
    Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
    1. Re:DHM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I though SCO had a patent on DHM? Then again, maybe it was IBM?

      Nope, your thinking of Amazon's "2 Hydrogen, 1 Oxygen, 0 click" sales model...

    2. Re:DHM by Dalcius · · Score: 1

      I wonder if a proposal put together in the professional looking fashion of these types of websites would get past the USPTO. I wouldn't be surprised, to be honest.

      "Yes, Mr. Billingburg of the Water Dept please. Yes, I'll hold..."
      "Mr. Billingburg, this is Tony from legal. You're not going to believe the call I got this morning..."

      --
      ~Dalcius
      Rome wasn't burnt in a day.
  17. Content on the Web by zalas · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Maybe this is why people shouldn't take any document on the Web at face value unless they check the sources or credentials. Not only can there be research study oriented "fake web pages", but there also can be pranks and out of date information (many pages do not have timestamps). I know many professors at my university view Web references as something that you use at last resort, when all other reference sources fail. However, another problem is that there IS a lot of good content on the web, and sometimes they disappear and can never be located again, unless they were lucky enough to have been crawled over by archive.org

    1. Re:Content on the Web by theLOUDroom · · Score: 1

      Maybe this is why people shouldn't take any document on the Web at face value unless they check the sources or credentials. Not only can there be research study oriented "fake web pages", but there also can be pranks and out of date information (many pages do not have timestamps). I know many professors at my university view Web references as something that you use at last resort, when all other reference sources fail.

      That's just silly.

      Sure info on the web can be false, so can info in books, newpapers, magazines, etc. In fact, it commonly is.

      Your profs are just crotchety old coots.

      There internet is where it's at these days. You should critically evaluate ANY source.
      Sure it's easy to post fake info on the web, but it's also to look at the source. Is the page located a mid.edu, or geocities.com? Does the person give thier name and credentials, etc?

      --
      Life is too short to proofread.
    2. Re:Content on the Web by Phurd+Phlegm · · Score: 1
      That's just silly.

      Sure info on the web can be false, so can info in books, newpapers, magazines, etc. In fact, it commonly is.

      Your profs are just crotchety old coots.

      Un huh. It's much easier to post false or misleading information on the web than to publich a book or get something into a refereed journal. That's why you should automatically assume that any information you looked up on the web is suspect. I guess the previous poster was tounge-in-cheek, so I guess I am too.

    3. Re:Content on the Web by efflux · · Score: 1

      Yeah, let's just ask Alan Sokal about that.

      --
      Do I contradict myself? Very well, then I contradict myself, I am large, I contain multitudes. -- Walt Whitman
  18. In the good old days we banned fluoride by mrwonton · · Score: 2, Funny

    Correction, fifty ninth graders and one gullable paralegal.

    --
    Not more than you need, just more than you want
    1. Re:In the good old days we banned fluoride by localhost00 · · Score: 1
      Correction, fifty ninth graders and one gullable paralegal.

      Actually, it was 49 freshmen. One of the freshmen knew it was water.

      --

      Calling atheism and agnosticism a religion is like calling bald a hair color.

  19. If DMHO is so dangerous... by KimJ721 · · Score: 1

    I imagine we'll soon see warning labels posted on every bottle of spring water.

    1. Re:If DMHO is so dangerous... by zalas · · Score: 2, Funny

      At least those labels would fit well with the "cholesterol-free!" labels I see on some bottles of water. What are they going to come up with next? "Nutrient free!" "Necessary for YOUR survival!"

    2. Re:If DMHO is so dangerous... by KimJ721 · · Score: 2, Funny

      I saw an ad for "diet water" in the Sunday circulars. I wonder how you reduce the calories of water.

    3. Re:If DMHO is so dangerous... by RichardX · · Score: 1

      They put that lethal stuff in BOTTLED WATER?!
      Fortunately for me I have a ready supply of pure dehydrated water

      --
      Curiosity was framed. Ignorance killed the cat.
    4. Re:If DMHO is so dangerous... by DrSkwid · · Score: 1


      add a diuretic

      --
      There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
    5. Re:If DMHO is so dangerous... by mwood · · Score: 1

      Water is low-carb too. Pass the fat-free salt, please.

  20. Love the add... by TamMan2000 · · Score: 1

    Did anyone else see this on the bottom of the dhmo website?

    I almost fell off my chair...

    --
    "I'll have a Guinness, no wait, make that a Coors Light" -Grad student I work with, who shall remain anonymous...
    1. Re:Love the add... by ChuyMatt · · Score: 1
      That is the most brilliant "ad" i have ever seen.

      these people are far too smart to be let loose in public.

    2. Re:Love the add... by edack · · Score: 1

      yes an I have one. It's a great conversation peive for folks that know and curiosity for those that don't. Cliff Stoll, yes that Cliff Stoll, is the man behind Acme Klein Bottles.

  21. Just like falling for stories at Slashdot by damitbill · · Score: 5, Insightful

    People react here just the same as ninth graders, it would seem.

    1. Re:Just like falling for stories at Slashdot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      Hey I thought we were ninth graders?
      What gives?
      Get off our site you old fart.

    2. Re:Just like falling for stories at Slashdot by Parsec · · Score: 1

      Actually, a few years ago slashdot broke the DHMO story. The story was only up for a few minutes before being deleted... and you won't find it in the /. archives... bummer.

  22. klein bottle by minus_273 · · Score: 1

    i like the banner ad for klein bottles at the bottom of the page

    --
    The war with islam is a war on the beast
    The war on terror is a war for peace
    1. Re:klein bottle by tritone · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Funny thing: the web page which looks real, is bogus. The banner ad for klein bottles which looks like a joke is real. It's for a company run by Cliff Stoll, author of the Cuckoo's Egg.

    2. Re:klein bottle by WolfWithoutAClause · · Score: 1
      The banner ad for klein bottles which looks like a joke is real.

      Sadly though, it's a real ad for fake Klein bottles.

      You can tell because on a true Klein bottle the bit where the neck goes through the side, it does this without touching the side.

      If anyone knows of a source for real Klein bottles I would be very, very interested :-)

      --

      -WolfWithoutAClause

      "Gravity is only a theory, not a fact!"
  23. Hmm... I've got an idea! by MadWicKdWire · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Maybe I'll put up a site about the disadvantages of outsourcing, then maybe the US Gov will try to ban it?!

    Just a wild idea!

    --
    Sig (appended to the end of comments you post, 120 chars)... oops
  24. Scientifically illiterate population by Viol8 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I find it worrying that any kind of person in government (even local government) could be so
    pig ignorant of basic science that they'd fall for
    this hoax. Didn't they listen AT ALL at school? But this seems to be a general problem in the population as a whole , even amongst suppposed intellectuals (read: arts & MBA
    graduates) and yet amazingly they're not even usually embarrsed about it. The only reason they are in this story is because it was made public. If their ignorance was revealed in private
    they probably wouldn't give a damn , yet if they'd found to be wanting in knowledge of business or the humanities they'd probably go red faced.

    1. Re:Scientifically illiterate population by TwistedGreen · · Score: 0, Funny

      What I want to know is who would consider an MBA graduate an intellectual?!

      Business has nothing to do with Science.

    2. Re:Scientifically illiterate population by swb · · Score: 1

      Technical literacy and hands-on skills are considered lower class, while arts and management are considered upper class.

      This explains why your boss can't use her computer (except when overcoming challenges to running .exes that come in email) -- if she knew those "techy details" she wouldn't be manager, since managers don't deal in details.

    3. Re:Scientifically illiterate population by DrSkwid · · Score: 0


      dude, don't be embarrsed

      --
      There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
    4. Re:Scientifically illiterate population by Doctor_D · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It doesn't surprise me much. I mean honestly most people who were good at science and math went into fields like engineering, computer science, or research. I can't even think of an example where someone with that background would involve themselves in politics.

      On a sidenote, my little sister is nearly finished with her MBA, and she hates math, science and computers. There have been times I wanted to give her an Etch-A-Sketch as a laptop...especially when she calls me on my vacation all upset because she caught the latest windows virus. What could I do? Nothing... Why? 1) I'm a UNIX engineer 2) I was driving into the Rockies in Colorado for a nice quiet peaceful weekend in a mountain cabin, and of course she's in Ohio. Anyway to the point... My little sis would go out of her way to make sure she didn't have to take science or math courses in college. She wanted to be a marketing major for her undergraduate degree, but chose public relations instead since it didn't have a requirement for Calc I.

      --
      "If you insist on using Windoze you're on your own."
    5. Re:Scientifically illiterate population by nomadic · · Score: 5, Informative

      I can't even think of an example where someone with that background would involve themselves in politics.

      Jimmy Carter.

    6. Re:Scientifically illiterate population by iworm · · Score: 1

      How true. Don't you find it odd how many "educated" people will not just admit that they know nothing about science or maths, but seem positively proud of it?

      "Oh, I'm really uselesss at maths" is apparently quite alright for an otherwise educated graduate. Imagine a scientist boasting "Oh I'm so ignorant about literature" - people would (rightly or wrongly) look down their noses at such an admission. But the inumerate boast? "Oh yes, me too!" - it's socially quite acceptable...

      Sad.

    7. Re:Scientifically illiterate population by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ronald Reagan

    8. Re:Scientifically illiterate population by HungWeiLo · · Score: 1

      It's a totally cultural thing. American society just does not value scientific intelligence.

      Interestingly, many notable presidents and Community Party members in China, for example, were electrical engineers or railroad engineers (older members). I'm sure there are other examples of other places where scientific minds have held positions of high political power.

      --
      There are a huge number of yeast infections in this county. Probably because we're downriver from the bread factory.
    9. Re:Scientifically illiterate population by Inthewire · · Score: 1

      What could I do? Nothing... Why? 1) I'm a UNIX engineer

      That's just begging to be republished sans context.

      --


      Writers imply. Readers infer.
  25. oldie but goodie by An0maly · · Score: 1

    this was funny when i saw it the first time 10 years ago. still cracks me up. good to know the research is continuing =)

    --
    "...if you don't like your job, you don't strike. You just go in every day and do it really half-assed..." -Homer
  26. Damn Right! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    It is half acid and half base!

    Can you imagine? It is like drinking battery acid and then eating lye soap!

  27. Google News to the rescue by frankie · · Score: 4, Informative
    The MSN link displays as a blank page, so here's some more references. Alison Viejo CA has officially claimed the heavyweight title for stupidest local government. I suspect they probably won't be dethroned until November 2nd at the earliest.

    --
    Google News is fun

    1. Re:Google News to the rescue by zalas · · Score: 1

      I find it odd that the MSNBC server returns a blank page. Perhaps they want to prevent themselves from paying all the extra bandwidth costs of a slashdotting? Or did we actually crash their server?

    2. Re:Google News to the rescue by Jerdie · · Score: 1

      I've noticed that within the past couple months msnbc started doing weird things like not coming up and what-not in mozilla.

      --
      Programming is simply the application of logic to creativity
    3. Re:Google News to the rescue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am shocked (shocked!) that a professional organization like MSNBC would provide content that doesn't appear properly in Mozilla. Don't these people test different browsers, like they're supposed to? Don't they realize that this makes it look like they only care about one browser on one platform?

  28. I claim prior art! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  29. Re:Urban legend? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    It's pretty cool when you can get modded up for posting a link that was in the article write-up. ;)

  30. You think that's dangerous! by LauraLolly · · Score: 2, Informative

    Wait until you learn the problems of driving on surfaces coated with the stuff.

    Wait until you also investigate the dangers of Silicon Dioxide! Most terrorists get their start throwing the stuff.

    Quite seriously, I always started the year of teaching chemistry with something much like this. My goal was to help the students become better informed.

  31. Almost... by steveorama · · Score: 5, Funny

    "City Officials Almost Ban Foam Cups"

    And this is almost news...

    1. Re:Almost... by wintermute740 · · Score: 3, Funny

      "And this is almost news..."

      Almost news for almost nerds. Stuff that almost matters???

  32. They SHOULD ban styrofoam by percepto · · Score: 5, Informative

    That stuff is nasty. Not only is it made from petroleum (America's crack), but it doesn't biodegrade and may leach toxins into the food it holds. Also, if it burns, it releases toxic particulates into the air.

    --

    The term "outside the box" is squarely within the box at this point.

    1. Re:They SHOULD ban styrofoam by Lord_Frederick · · Score: 5, Funny

      Yes, but it keeps my coffee so toasty warm!

    2. Re:They SHOULD ban styrofoam by Phisbut · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I have a classy inox cup that does the same thing, and that is reusable. We do depend on styrofoam too much.

      --
      After 3 days without programming, life becomes meaningless
      - The Tao of Programming
    3. Re:They SHOULD ban styrofoam by frankie · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Yeah, Intentionally Disposable + Non-biodegradeable = A Bad Thing.

      But on the bright side, you can dissolve styrofoam in gasoline (or other hydrocarbons). When you add enough, the solution becomes viscous and sticky (just like honey). If you love the smell of napalm in the morning, styrofoam is your friend. :)

    4. Re:They SHOULD ban styrofoam by lobsterGun · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Quite the contrary.

      Styrofoam should be a preferred material based on how well it can be recycled.

    5. Re:They SHOULD ban styrofoam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ....and as we all know, if you mix it with gasoline, you get napalm!

      (according to the anarchists cookbook at least)

    6. Re:They SHOULD ban styrofoam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Styrofoam is a brand name and should always be capitalized.

    7. Re:They SHOULD ban styrofoam by ichimunki · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Why did parent poster get modded down (flamebait/troll, not off-topic, I note) for suggesting they should ban styrofoam? Yes, the dihydrogen monoxide bit of this is fairly amusing, but criticizing the use of styrofoam is a troll? I don't think so. It's a perfectly fair question considering the objections raised (petroleum product, non-biodegradable, toxins released when burned, possible leaching into food)... are these concerns pure myth or scare-mongering on the same level as the H20 spoof? If so, can you prove it?

      --
      I do not have a signature
    8. Re:They SHOULD ban styrofoam by p4ul13 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Explaining the joke: Effectively sucking the humor out of a gag since 1982.

      --
      Paul Lenhart writes words!
    9. Re:They SHOULD ban styrofoam by B'Trey · · Score: 1

      Let's analyze, shall we? The title of the post is "The SHOULD ban styrofoam," not "They should ban DHMO." Clearer now?

      --

      "The legitimate powers of government extend only to such acts as are injurious to others." Thomas Jefferson.

    10. Re:They SHOULD ban styrofoam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I miss the old McDonalds styrofoam containers for everything. The best was the packaging for the hot side hot/cold side cold burger - it used DOUBLE the styrofoam of an ordinary burger container.

      USA! USA!

    11. Re:They SHOULD ban styrofoam by LarsWestergren · · Score: 4, Informative

      Styrofoam should be a preferred material based on how well it can be recycled.

      Perhaps it can be recycled well in theory, but it is rare for it to be recycled, especially when used for fast food containers.

      A lot of people just throw it wherever, and once out in nature it lasts virtually forever, unlike products made from alternative materials like paper and starch.

      --

      Being bitter is drinking poison and hoping someone else will die

    12. Re:They SHOULD ban styrofoam by jedidiah · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Those old styrofoam containers were also much easier to recycle than the corrogated paper that they use now. A good example of the destructive power of clueless tree huggers and the PR obsessed corps that listen to them.

      Paper Good! Plastic Bad!...

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    13. Re:They SHOULD ban styrofoam by Tassach · · Score: 4, Funny

      Don't forget the aluminum and/or magnesium powder in your recipe. Without that addition, your sticky gas/styrofoam mixture isn't particuarly effective.

      --
      Why is it that the proponents of "one nation under God" are so eager to get rid of "liberty and justice for all"?
    14. Re:They SHOULD ban styrofoam by TheLink · · Score: 1

      ROFL.

      BTW do you happen to be a citizen of the USA?

      --
    15. Re:They SHOULD ban styrofoam by Chris+Burke · · Score: 1

      Have you EVER seen a styrofoam recycling bin where they were serving things in styrofoam containers?

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    16. Re:They SHOULD ban styrofoam by Ed_Moyse · · Score: 1

      Congratulations, you have just qualified yourself for a job as a state official in CA!!!! All you need to do to is send 5000 USD in administration fees to the following bank account:

      Edward Moyse
      a/c 00178892
      MoronsMakeMeRich Bank
      Switzerland

      Thanks for your time!

    17. Re:They SHOULD ban styrofoam by Gannoc · · Score: 1

      Perhaps it can be recycled well in theory, but it is rare for it to be recycled, especially when used for fast food containers.

      I haven't seen fast food served in styrofoam in over 10 years.

    18. Re:They SHOULD ban styrofoam by DavidTC · · Score: 1
      Yes, except no one recycles.

      If you're going to throw it away, paper is infinitely better than plastic. Not to mention is a renewable resource.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
    19. Re:They SHOULD ban styrofoam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I knew those damn greenies were up to something. Collecting garbage and used styrofoam from the roadside. Trying to make us cut down on gas use so there's more for their own foul plot... Terrorists! Bloody terrorists! In my day, we'd have sent them off to the coal mines to learn some respect.

    20. Re:They SHOULD ban styrofoam by Politburo · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Chain fast food (McDs, Burger King, etc.) is not served in styrofoam anymore. However, many, many small delis and shops use styrofoam packaging, like the deli in my office building. The take out at my alma mater's dining halls uses styrofoam packaging. That alone is thousands of meals a day with a styrofoam box and cup.

    21. Re:They SHOULD ban styrofoam by TheRealMindChild · · Score: 1, Informative

      Not to nitpick, but Styrofoam is a name brand of Polystyrene.

      --

      "When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back!" -- Cave Johnson
    22. Re:They SHOULD ban styrofoam by mwood · · Score: 1

      If we had somewhere to recycle it, I'd be going there. Those eco-friendly green containers sprinkled all over the city only take polyethylene; no types 3, 4, 5, *or* 6. I hate sending polystyrene to the landfill but there's no other place *to* send it around here.

    23. Re:They SHOULD ban styrofoam by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
      "...especially when used for fast food containers."

      Yeah...But I've always felt that McDonald's Quarter Pounders just don't taste the same anymore, since they quit putting them in the styrofoam containers...kept them nice and juicy and warm till ya got home...

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    24. Re:They SHOULD ban styrofoam by zymurgy_cat · · Score: 5, Interesting

      But on the bright side, you can dissolve styrofoam in gasoline (or other hydrocarbons). When you add enough, the solution becomes viscous and sticky (just like honey). If you love the smell of napalm in the morning, styrofoam is your friend. :)

      We used to do this in the boy scouts. We'd then pour/mold the mixture onto a newspaper, twist the newspaper around the stuff, and make a "starter log" for camping. Make 'em two or three inches thick, throw a couple into your fire pit, and you've got a great way to start a fire. Very good for drying out damp wood and getting a blaze going.

      --
      -- Fugacity: Confusing chemists since 1908
    25. Re:They SHOULD ban styrofoam by ajs318 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      But corrugated paper is easier to recycle if you have a bloody great big cooking range to hand .....

      Cardboard soaked with organic grease burns fairly cleanly, especially if it isn't the only thing drawing the fire. It's made from plants, so it's not going to add any more CO2 to the atmosphere. It reduces the amount of fossil fuels used for cooking. It reduces the need to transport used containers to recycling plants {which often uses as much or more energy than initial manufacture}.

      Burning food packaging in the stoves used to cook the food seems to make perfect sense ..... as long as the packaging is made with due regard for its secondary purpose {burning certain plastics in a cooking range would not be such a good idea}. You'll never have enough packaging to run on that alone, of course, but that's not quite the intention.

      --
      Je fume. Tu fumes. Nous fûmes!
    26. Re:They SHOULD ban styrofoam by madcow_ucsb · · Score: 1

      Word to the wise (or is it stupid?): If you decide to do this, be sure to pour the gooey mess onto some old metal or something.

      When I was a kid I did it right on the patio in the back yard. I'm sure that layer of black plastic stuff will be stuck on there for all eternity.

      It's not a very impressive flame as-is, but damn it'll go for days, so don't think you can just wait for the fuel to burn off.

      Oh and don't stand downwind of this thing. It has one of those Toxic Death Clouds. It tates like burning.

      That said, kids, don't play with fire. Not cuz you'll burn yourself (don't touch it, duh) but it's just too damn stressful trying to get rid of the evidence (Ahhh, car's pulling into garage, must put out flaming goo of death!)

    27. Re:They SHOULD ban styrofoam by The+Only+Druid · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure, but I thought I remembered being told that this released some toxic gas in the process of being dissolved. Can anyone back me up here? (or refute me?)

      --
      "Stumble before you crawl"
    28. Re:They SHOULD ban styrofoam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Something worth being aware of, the stuff is soluble in citrus essential oils. If you leave a citrus drink that contains any of the oils in a styrofoam cup for long it will start to dissolve the cup.

    29. Re:They SHOULD ban styrofoam by hankwang · · Score: 4, Informative
      I remembered being told that this released some toxic gas in the process of being dissolved.

      Styrofoam is the polymer polystyrene in foam form, that is, with a lot of small gas bubbles. Google tells me that commonly used gases are ethylene, CFCs (not commonly anymore), and HCFCs. These gases are not particularly toxic to humans, but can be an environmental issue (i.e., the hole in the ozone layer), especially CFCs and HCFCs.

    30. Re:They SHOULD ban styrofoam by Peale · · Score: 5, Funny

      Christ, do I have a story about that. Luckily nothing bad came of it.

      I used to have this idiot friend Mike when I was a kid (14 or so). I was a freshman in high school, and he was a grade below me (in middle school).

      One day I was showing him just that; taking styrofoam and disolving it in gasoline makes a pretty nice fire display. We had our fun in the backyard, and left the rest in a bucket outside.

      A month goes by. Mike calls me up asking if he can have what's left in the bucket. I say sure, why not.

      Now the styrofoam we used was the green stuff that veggies and meat are served in, so when we started it was a nice green slime. Now it had the consistency of Play-Doh.

      I thought nothing of this, until the next day, @ lunch, when there was a schoolwide announcement: "WOULD ARTHUR PEALE PLEASE COME TO THE PRINCIPAL'S OFFICE IMMEDIATELY!" yes, those capital letters are there to display the fact that they were SHOUTING into the microphone, as well as having turned the volume almost all the way up on the PA system.

      I head to the main office, and the secretary looks at me and says, "Oh, you're in trouble now, Arthur! Go see Mr. Perry, the Vice Principal."

      I enter his office, and that's when I notice the two uniformed police officers standing there. They invite me to have a seat.

      At this point I have no clue what's going on, until one officer says "Arthur, I'd like to see your license to make explosives, please."

      I, of course, being 14, did not have one. I was clueless about what was going on, until they mentioned a green substance that a "Mike Parsons" had brought to school, and had been lighting out in the parking lot with some friends of his.

      Aparently word got around to what he was doing, someone approached a teacher, the police and fire department were called, along with a bomb unit. The stuff looked so strange and alien they had no clue what kind of explosive it was. It was being treated very gingerly.

      After I told the officers what it was, they told me that they weren't going to press charges. Mike got a week suspension, and I went back to class.

    31. Re:They SHOULD ban styrofoam by _randy_64 · · Score: 1

      Especially when you could be using EarthShell! Encourage your local fast food place to use it.

      --
      I mod down all the "free iPod"-sig losers.
    32. Re:They SHOULD ban styrofoam by forevermore · · Score: 1
      Styrofoam should be a preferred material based on how well it can be recycled

      And how do I go about doing this recycling thing? In Seattle, my curbside recycling takes just about anything recyclable (from steel to aseptic soy milk containers), but polystyrene is right there on the DO NOT list. The process of recycling may be easy enough, but finding a city recycling program that actually does it is far more difficult.

      --
      Do you really need reason for beer? Wingman Brewers
    33. Re:They SHOULD ban styrofoam by aonaran · · Score: 1

      A paper cup works well enough for a small coffee, two paper cups, one inside the other, for large or extra-large coffees. The only time my Tim Hortons coffee (always in a paper cup) ever gets cold is when I order an extra large and they double cup it with a small cup so it's enough I can hold onto it comfortably, but not enough to keep the heat in long enough for me to actually consume an extra large.

      double cupping sounds wasteful, but at least the paper can biodegrade.

    34. Re:They SHOULD ban styrofoam by lobsterGun · · Score: 1

      In Japan there is a recycling truck that travels from dumpster to dumpster grabbing the styrofoam. The spray it with an orange based solvent that liquifies it. The solvent is easy to remove from the sytrofoam leaving it in an easy to recycle state.

      Linkey Linkey!

    35. Re:They SHOULD ban styrofoam by lobsterGun · · Score: 1

      get off your butt and start a drive! Start a ballot initiative. Talk to your city govt. Get involved!

    36. Re:They SHOULD ban styrofoam by Sepper · · Score: 1

      Right now it's not really posible to double-cup at your local Tim Hortons... They won't let you 'roll up the rim' twice with one coffee...

      They could also do as Second cup and Starbuck does: add a ring a paper around the cup... less waste that way...

      --
      I live in Soviet Canuckistan you insensitive clod!
    37. Re:They SHOULD ban styrofoam by clintp · · Score: 1

      A paper bag full of potato chips work wonderfully and don't smell nearly as bad when burning.

      --
      Get off my lawn.
    38. Re:They SHOULD ban styrofoam by canajin56 · · Score: 1

      The average dump is 1% disposable diapers, 0.5% fast food garbage by weight, 0.33% by volume. Less than 1% styrofoam, including the styrofoam from the fast food garbage. They contain 16% plastic bags. They contain 50% paper, most of them newspapers. You can dig through a dump and find a New York Times from 1951, and it will be as fresh as the day it was printed. Styrofoam isn't biodegradable? Neither is paper. 18% is food and yard waste. It doesn't decompose either. Nothing decomposes in a dump. All the garbage is compacted. No oxygen = no bacteria = no decomposition. I'm not sure what the other ~14% was. Probably metals and electronics.

      A single persons subscription to the New York Times contributes more garbage than a small city of people eating from styrofoam containers for a year. And it probably took more DHMO to make the ink and paper than it did to make the styrofoam! ;)

      --
      ASCII stupid question, get a stupid ANSI
    39. Re:They SHOULD ban styrofoam by B3ryllium · · Score: 1

      Why "since 1982"?

    40. Re:They SHOULD ban styrofoam by uberdave · · Score: 1

      Styrofoam has joined the ranks of kleenex, zippers, and aspirin. The brand name has become so engrained that it has become the name of the product.

    41. Re:They SHOULD ban styrofoam by SARSDEATH · · Score: 1

      Well, better put a ban on Valcanos, Damn toxins.....

    42. Re:They SHOULD ban styrofoam by eofpi · · Score: 1

      double cupping sounds wasteful, but at least the paper can biodegrade.

      Paper can be recycled, too.

      --
      Y'know, you blow up one sun and suddenly everyone expects you to walk on water.
    43. Re:They SHOULD ban styrofoam by aonaran · · Score: 1

      They still do it for me, they just use a normal, non-contest cup for the outer cup.

    44. Re:They SHOULD ban styrofoam by eofpi · · Score: 1

      Gotten McDonald's hotcakes recently? Last I checked, they were still served on styrofoam.

      --
      Y'know, you blow up one sun and suddenly everyone expects you to walk on water.
    45. Re:They SHOULD ban styrofoam by SubtleNuance · · Score: 1

      There should be a deposit on a fixed number of Industry/Government approved re-usable containers. Those containers would be 100% of what you get in the grocery store.

      The 'right' for some company to require a 'unique' and absolutely disposable package in the name of 'brand-marketing' does not trump my right as a citizen to a clean commons. Further, I am tired of my tax $ being spent to clean up post-consumer waste -- let the users or producers pay! AND IF NOT(!) then a proper solution needs to be found to fix the problem... reusable, deposit based packaging is the answer.

    46. Re:They SHOULD ban styrofoam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Right now it's not really posible to double-cup at your local Tim Hortons... They won't let you 'roll up the rim' twice with one coffee...

      Take off the second roll-up and ask them to destroy it.

    47. Re:They SHOULD ban styrofoam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not really, but it does release a bunch of toxic stuff when you burn it.

    48. Re:They SHOULD ban styrofoam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ..ready to be spilled on your lap at DT with no escape.

    49. Re:They SHOULD ban styrofoam by aprentic · · Score: 1

      That's depressing, man.
      When I was a boy scout we were only allowed to use 3 matches and whatever we could find in the woods to start any given fire.
      Needless to say, we got very good at burning stuff.

    50. Re:They SHOULD ban styrofoam by p4ul13 · · Score: 1
      Are you trying to goad me into explaining my joke-like comment, or trying to find out if there actually was signifigance to the chosen year?

      Either way, the answer is that when the year's digits are added up and multiplied by 3.05, you get 61.

      --
      Paul Lenhart writes words!
    51. Re:They SHOULD ban styrofoam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      put a little nail polish remover on it. Acetone does wonders reducing the polymer.

    52. Re:They SHOULD ban styrofoam by rsclient · · Score: 1

      I did an experiment at work with my trusty Dallas iButton temperature recorder:

      Coffee in a plastic mug took 20 minutes to drop to 120 degrees (starting at, IIRC, 145).

      Coffee in a styrofoam cup took 12 minutes to drop the same amount.

      --
      Want a sig like mine? Join ACM's SigSig today!
    53. Re:They SHOULD ban styrofoam by tenton · · Score: 1

      Why "since 1982"?

      That could be explained, but it would suck the humor out of the joke.

    54. Re:They SHOULD ban styrofoam by CyBlue · · Score: 1

      Paper and grease *DO* release CO2. Organic material + Oxygen = carbon residue + CO2 (and various amounts of other stuff). This paper/grease burning oven would pollute a lot worse than something like natural gas.

    55. Re:They SHOULD ban styrofoam by gnu-generation-one · · Score: 1

      If you want to be environmentally-friendly about it, you can take your fashionable mug with you to the cafe at university...

      and find out they only serve it in styrofoam cups (of a known size), so you have to buy coffee in the foam cup, pour it into your mug, and throw the foam away unused. Congratulations to Nottingham university on their environmental policy.

    56. Re:They SHOULD ban styrofoam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      " you can dissolve styrofoam in gasoline"

      or, more easily, in nail polish remover.

    57. Re:They SHOULD ban styrofoam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What the hell is a "hotcake?" In America, home of McDonalds, it's called a fucking pancake, you communist heathen.

    58. Re:They SHOULD ban styrofoam by BigBir3d · · Score: 1

      My old school in Colorado did that many many years ago (1988 or 1989 IIRC). The wonderfull idiots at the school district thought it would be great to save money on washing permanent (heavy duty plastic) plates, silverware, bowls, etc, by switching to styrofoam. This was back when Earth Day meant something, so we got together (students of the school - 1,000 or so) and stopped buying lunches! When I say we, I mean we put people at the entrance to the area to pick up your food, with fliers, and said "sorry we are not allowing you to pollute the environment today" or something close to. The school stopped using the styrofoam (returned stock to the people they bought it from), and I think the school still uses permanent stuff to this day.

      This was the only time that I truly agreed with environmental activism... of course we did actually research this the real way... library with published scientific journals and such.

      The school you ask? Back then it was 7-12th grades. Now it is just a HS.

    59. Re:They SHOULD ban styrofoam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      After I told the officers what it was, they told me that they weren't going to press charges. Mike got a week suspension, and I went back to class.

      When thinking about this little episode, do you ever stop for a moment, think about TODAY'S school environment, and think, "Dear God, I'm lucky people still had common sense?"

    60. Re:They SHOULD ban styrofoam by atomicdragon · · Score: 1

      They do release CO2, but there is no net change in the CO2 in the atmosphere. Since the carbon in the plants comes from pulling CO2 out of the air, burning any recently living plant material would just release CO2 that was already was previously in the air.

    61. Re:They SHOULD ban styrofoam by dacaldar · · Score: 1

      But then what would High School students use as bomb calorimeters in their labs?

    62. Re:They SHOULD ban styrofoam by B3ryllium · · Score: 1
      That could be explained, but it would suck the humor out of the joke.

      Uh oh, they're on to me!

    63. Re:They SHOULD ban styrofoam by CyBlue · · Score: 1

      ummmm.. where do you thing coal and oil come from? They're decomposed plants. Burning gasoline is no different than burning paper. Anything you burn that puts CO2 into the atmosphere is just as bad as anything else.

    64. Re:They SHOULD ban styrofoam by CyBlue · · Score: 1

      To clarify, regardless of if something was recently living, plant or otherwise, you're still contributing relatively the same amount of CO2 regardless of what you burn. So why would you burn paper and grease which has a lot of contaminants and other chemicals when you could pick a cleaner fuel such as natural gas, nuclear, hydroelectric, etc.?

    65. Re:They SHOULD ban styrofoam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Not to nitpick, but Styrofoam is a name brand of Polystyrene.

      Not to nitpick, but Sytrofoam is only a name brand of Polystyrene *FOAM*.

    66. Re:They SHOULD ban styrofoam by atomicdragon · · Score: 1

      Assuming you don't cut down a bunch of rain forests or something to grow your crops, you are growing stuff that would not have been growing otherwise that pulls extra CO2 out of the air. This "no net CO2" thing is mostly used in reference to biodiesel instead of the paper and stuff, where fuel comes from short-lived corn instead of trees. Of course recycling would be better for the paper. But for stuff like greasy food containers, it might be better than throwing it in a dump where it will release stuff, like methane, into the atmosphere (I have don't know which way produces more nasty junk, but the methane is a stronger greenhouse gas compared to the same amount of CO2). It is not a matter of burning something just for the sake of power, but instead what to do with the garbage leftover. The process could potentially be relatively clean, although a bad implementation would be dirty in the same way a hydrogen powered car would be dirty if you generate the hydrogen with electricity from a fossil fuel plant.

    67. Re:They SHOULD ban styrofoam by cwsulliv · · Score: 1

      Put some 7-Up or other lemon-lime soda in a styrofoam cup. Take a few sips and you'll notice the styrofoam is etched at the original level of the soda by the citrus oil film on the surface.

      So if you do your part and drink lots of lemon-lime soda, there will be that much less styrofoam left to harm the environment.

    68. Re:They SHOULD ban styrofoam by CyBlue · · Score: 1

      Alright, I can see where you're coming from with the corn and biodeisel. This would be the same thing as requiring the growth of X acres of corn for every gallon of regular deisel consumed. However, the trees for the paper products were going to be grown for paper anyway, so whether or not you burn them as fuel, they'll still exist and will have removed CO2 from the atmosphere... as opposed to the corn that won't be grown unless its made into the deisel and thus profited from. I just think greasy big Mac wrappers wouldn't be a very clean fuel. So, at least we're halfway agreeing now ;-).

    69. Re:They SHOULD ban styrofoam by atomicdragon · · Score: 1

      Actually, I think we both agree on this quite well, since I would question burning the stuff from trees unless I knew exactly how much junk was released in different disposal methods. I was just trying to explain "no net CO2" argument above since I heard it a lot at a job I had related to biodiesel. There is also a big difference between what I would want to burn in my house, for like stove or furnace, than in my car. Assuming a greasy fast food wrapper is like biodiesel (biodiesel can be made from used fast food frying oil), then from pollution measurements I did, I know it is clean in terms of some pollutants, like sulfur based ones. But the pollution monitoring equipment must not detect the "french fry" molecule since everything within 20 feet of the biodiesel engine smells strongly of french fries.

    70. Re:They SHOULD ban styrofoam by ajs318 · · Score: 1

      Plants are made [mainly] from carbon, which they get from CO2 in the atmosphere while they are growing. Once a carbon atom, always a carbon atom. Burning something made from plants just puts back exactly whatever the plants took out. That's O-level chemistry. Since the trees used to make paper are grown on private land which does not earn any money for its owner unless something useful is growing on it at all times, money is what keeps the cycle going.

      Fossil fuels were formed millions of years ago and left undisturbed beneath the Earth's crust. CO2 levels stabilised since then, till we started pushing them up again by burning that stored carbon.

      Natural gas and petroleum products may be chemically purer hydrocarbons than recently-deceased organic matter, but the fact remains that their contribution to the atmosphere is essentially foreign; whereas plant- and animal-derived fuels, although apparently less chemically pure, are only replacing something that was already there before they were grown.

      --
      Je fume. Tu fumes. Nous fûmes!
    71. Re:They SHOULD ban styrofoam by CyBlue · · Score: 1

      Oh great! A way to contribute to the obesity level. Can you imagine the sales increases at McDonalds if every couple hours a biodeisel truck came through the neighborhood and made everything smell like fresh french fries? *grin* That's almost as bad as someone at work cooking popcorn. There's an immediate line at the microwave at the first whiff. On the other hand, if every car were burning biodeisel, maybe french fries would become rather unappetizing.

    72. Re:They SHOULD ban styrofoam by Peale · · Score: 1

      When thinking about this little episode, do you ever stop for a moment, think about TODAY'S school environment, and think, "Dear God, I'm lucky people still had common sense?"

      All the time. Man I'm glad I grew up in the 80's.

  33. American Education by jeffbruce · · Score: 1

    Am I only one that finds ironic that California is not one of the states trying to ban teaching evolution in schools?

  34. styrofoam and water by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Jumping on DHM was certainly silly, but the last time I checked the important ingredient in foam cups is ... styrofoam and not water. We drink a sip out of the foam cup and then toss it into the next landfill, they should have banned the foam cup but for the right reasons.

  35. more like by dsanfte · · Score: 2, Troll

    More like "Living in California is known to cause an unknown disease." A disease of the mind.

    --
    occultae nullus est respectus musicae - originally a Greek proverb
  36. California Dreaming by tsmithnj · · Score: 1

    This confirms what I have always suspected...

    It's no wonder CA is such a welcoming environment to idiots like Larry Ellison or Arnold.

  37. Attribution? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Donesn't any of the /. crowd recognize a rip-off of the Penn and Teller "bullshit" sketch? As I recall, they did a petition to ban the substance at a rally of "environmentalists" to show the same effect.

    1. Re:Attribution? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Didn't you recognize Penn and Teller as a rip-off of prior skepticism? What goes around comes around.

  38. Re:I for one, Welcome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is what I love about Slashdot. It's like reading the unfunny links on Fark all over again posted 2 days later.

  39. A poem. by eigerface · · Score: 5, Funny


    Little Johnny was a chemist.

    Little Johnny is no more.

    'Cause what he thought was H2O.

    Was really H2SO4

    1. Re:A poem. by johnlcallaway · · Score: 1
      I heard it a little differently
      Little Johnny took a drink

      But he shall drink no more

      For what he thought was H20

      Was H2SO4
      --
      I rarely read replies, it's my opinion and if you thought about your opinion a little more, I'm OK with that.
    2. Re:A poem. by SychoSyd · · Score: 1

      Not that it matters, but it goes like this in the song "Acid Head" by Tourniquet:

      Johnny was a chemist's son

      But Johnny is no more

      'Cause what he thought was H20

      Was H2SO4

    3. Re:A poem. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Have you no sense of rhythm?

      Say it out loud: "what he thought was H2O was H2SO4."

      Now add the "really" in there.

      Doesn't sound as smooth, does it?

    4. Re:A poem. by pclminion · · Score: 1
      It works either way. The other way has its own, equally pleasing rhythm, if you can find it.

      His original version has hints of "The Raven" in its rhythm (among other things).

      The goal of poetry is not to sound "smooth," it's more complex than that. It's true that this poem is humorous, but it has its own subtleties.

    5. Re:A poem. by CAIMLAS · · Score: 1

      I don't know wher eyou heard this version, but the version I heard was in a 1994ish song by Tourniquet, "Acidhead":

      Johny was a chemist's son
      but johny is no more
      what johny thought was h2o
      was really h2so4

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
    6. Re:A poem. by aclarke · · Score: 1
      They quoted a poem which had been around for much longer.

      I'm pretty sure they came up with "Pathogenic Ocular Dissonance" on their own though. What do you know, another Slashdot-reading Tourniquet fan :-)

    7. Re:A poem. by Mjec · · Score: 1

      Little Johnny had a test tube
      he filled it full of gas
      he pointed it while heating
      and blew off half his... fingers

      Acutally, our entire year 11 class (30-odd people) except me believed dhmo.org when we were shown it... during a Theory of Knowledge lesson all about not believing what you read. Hmm....

      --
      "But everyone should know everything." -markab
    8. Re:A poem. by CAIMLAS · · Score: 1

      heh, woot :)

      yeah, tourniquet always manages to come out with some very original stuff. definately one of the more tallented, under appreciated bands out there. they're what i'd term intellectual metal. :)

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
  40. Ummm, the state of California... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    This product is known to the state of California to cause an unknown disease.

    The state of California is an unknown disease.

    1. Re:Ummm, the state of California... by scrytch · · Score: 1

      > The state of California is an unknown disease.

      Most of us would be more than happy to be excised and secede. Wouldn't have to put up with your stupid politicia--

      ah crap, arnold.

      Yes, we are certifiably nuts.

      --
      I've finally had it: until slashdot gets article moderation, I am not coming back.
  41. Still... by Bull999999 · · Score: 1

    The city wants to save you from yourself because if you drink enough of this "Dihydrogen Monoxide", it can kill you.

    --
    1f u c4n r34d th1s u r34lly n33d t0 g37 l41d
  42. Yeah, 89% of americans would ban it. by Moderation+abuser · · Score: 1, Funny

    And I say too right! Anything with the word "monoxide" in it *should* be banned!

    Yeah, that's been in my usenet sig for ages.

    --
    Government of the people, by corporate executives, for corporate profits.
  43. Trying to remember Chem I... by Unknown+Kadath · · Score: 1

    Wouldn't it be oxygen dihydride, since the oxygen atom is central? Analogous to carbon dioxide?

    This bugs me every time I see the joke. I am such a dork.

    -Carolyn

    --
    Like Daddy always said: if you can't dazzle 'em with brilliance, baffle 'em with bullshit.
    1. Re:Trying to remember Chem I... by BCoates · · Score: 1

      I prefer Hydrogen Oxide.

    2. Re:Trying to remember Chem I... by p3d0 · · Score: 3, Informative

      I think the naming depends on which radical donates the electron, but I'm not a chemist.

      --
      Patrick Doyle
      I mod down every jackass who puts his moderation policy in his sig. Oh, wait a sec....
    3. Re:Trying to remember Chem I... by Unknown+Kadath · · Score: 1

      Well, oxygen is Group VI, so it wants 2 electrons, I think (ahgahd...chemistry...so long ago), and the hydrogens both have one valence electron to share, so they form a covalent bond where everybody fakes having a full valence shell. Nobody's donating anything because it's not an ionic compound. But chemistry naming conventions are screwy when it comes to both hydrogen and oxygen, so maybe I'll just sit back and wait for a chemist to set me straight.

      -Carolyn

      --
      Like Daddy always said: if you can't dazzle 'em with brilliance, baffle 'em with bullshit.
    4. Re:Trying to remember Chem I... by Da+Web+Guru · · Score: 1

      It would probably make sense, but the fear wouldn't spread as easily. Since oxygen is already associated with being good for you, nobody would be afraid of it. People are already afraid of carbon monoxide, so as soon as they hear monoxide in any chemical's name (especially with dihydrogen, something most people have never heard of anyway), they automatically assume that it is an evil chemical.

      --

      --guru

    5. Re:Trying to remember Chem I... by pclminion · · Score: 1
      The naming is typically based on oxidation numbers (or charge, for ionic compounds). If you look it up in Google you'll learn all about it.

      For example, lithium is in the same column of the periodic table as hydrogen, and it forms Li2O. The oxygen is central in that case, too, but we don't call it "oxygen dilithide," we call it "lithium oxide."

      For CO2, it's "carbon dioxide" because the carbon is using extra electrons to complete the valence shell of the oxygen.

    6. Re:Trying to remember Chem I... by p3d0 · · Score: 1

      That depends on your definition of "donating". I never said anything about ionic compounds. You say "share", I say "donate", let's call the whole thing off.

      --
      Patrick Doyle
      I mod down every jackass who puts his moderation policy in his sig. Oh, wait a sec....
  44. Genius children. by ideatrack · · Score: 0

    Wow a 14 year old in the 59th grade.

    Ok I'm just entertaining myself here...

    1. Re:Genius children. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      The 59th grade?!

      Sounds a little slow to me...

  45. It's a good thing slashdotters aren't this stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    I mean, making assumptions on vague wording and overblown generalizations... BTW, Windows is the tool of the devil and Linux is Jesus!

  46. Re:Urban legend? by lukewarmfusion · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Not only was that posted in the article above, but if you actually read the Snopes writeup you'll see that it's true.

    So... urban fact.

  47. Re:Urban legend? by dan+dan+the+dna+man · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    MM nice, RTFA headline? The link is in there - nicely relinked sir! You must not be new here ;)

    --
    I don't read your sig, why do you read mine?
  48. The funny thing is, DHMO isn't even the right name by sirwired · · Score: 3, Informative

    Di-Hydrogen Monoxide isn't the proper name for water. That would imply a H2 ion bonded to a O ion. IIRC, this is not correcct. It's been ten years since I took chemistry, but shouldn't it really be Hydrogen Hydroxide? (H bonded to OH)

    SirWired

  49. Honestly, though... by JohnnyComeLately · · Score: 4, Insightful
    This couldn't have even come close to being a surprise. If you've EVER watched Jay Leno more than a few times, you've seen JayWalking or Battle of the Jaywalkers. Or heck, even Street Smarts.

    So before you start lambasting Kawhlefornia (Terminator speak for California), remember these shows prove it happens everywhere.

    Oh look a puppy!

    1. Re:Honestly, though... by BCoates · · Score: 1

      (tries to stifle laughter as you get modded up as interesting)

    2. Re:Honestly, though... by npistentis · · Score: 1

      point of order... isnt JayWalking filmed entirely in Cali? Doesnt that prove the point that maybe California slowly slipping into the Pacific has its perks...

      --
      Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room!
    3. Re:Honestly, though... by BCoates · · Score: 1

      Yeah, both it and Street Smarts are filmed in the LA area... I hope that was the joke.

    4. Re:Honestly, though... by JohnnyComeLately · · Score: 1
      Ummmm....no...it is not filmed entirely in LA. It is primarily, but not exclusively. He has traveled to Michigan, Arizona and several other states to universities and (on rare occasions) other public areas.

      I'm not sure about where Street Smarts is filmed, but most people who live here aren't native. So the show would be grabbing a variety of both native and non-native participants.

      The joke is the entire population, not just one demographic.

    5. Re:Honestly, though... by pokeyburro · · Score: 1

      I've always had the distinct impression that JayWalking is done in California, too (Burbank and environs). No idea where Street Smarts does its thing.

      --
      Lately democracy seems to be based on the skybox, the Happy Meal box, the X-box, and the idiot box.
    6. Re:Honestly, though... by c13v3rm0nk3y · · Score: 1

      My opinion only, but this link only seems to highlight for me how unfunny Jay Leno is. It's pretty easy to make people look stupid on TV, anyway.

      CNN does it on a daily basis!

      --
      -- clvrmnky
    7. Re:Honestly, though... by JohnnyComeLately · · Score: 1
      Yeap, a little PayPal donation can go a long ways nowadays :D

      I was kinda surprised too, myself. Must be locals supporting me.

    8. Re:Honestly, though... by z4ce · · Score: 1

      FYI.. the JayWalking stuff is a total scam. My friend's friend was in NY and asked to do that. They're told to play stupid.

      I assume the same is true with Street Smarts.

      Ian

    9. Re:Honestly, though... by Jerf · · Score: 1

      I don't watch Street Smarts, but I was intruiged by the premise so I did watch one show.

      The conclusion I came to is that it is totally scripted, because IIRC, the use the same groups of people over and over again, of the three people always precisely one is correct (odds of that are atrocious), and those who are wrong are wrong in ways that are too humorous, too often, to be coincidence.

      Now, if they interviewed lots of people and they always pulled the funniest and always only pulled one correct answer, then maybe there would be some versimilitude. Then you'd see a lot of different people, some of whom are honestly mistaken. But as it stands, it's pretty much as scripted as the WWF.

      Like I said, I was intrigued by the premise, but since it's obviously faked I lost all interest. That, and the stupidity of the contestants was breathtaking.... and again, that's gotta be deliberate. All in all, a show that ought to be insulting to the viewer's intelligence, but given who must watch it, probably isn't.

      On-topic point? Well, remember that half of the population is below average*. That leaves a lot of people who will fall for stuff like the DHM foolery, and ironically, they will do it because they are trying to look intelligent and concerned.

      *: Pedants note: On a population the size of Earth, with a normal distribution of intelligence virtually a given thanks to the Central Limit Theorum, there's no need to confuse people by talking about the "median"; the difference between median and average intelligence on the planet would be far below the measurement error.

    10. Re:Honestly, though... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't know it's scripted. Why is it so impossible that they'd ask a lot of people a lot of questions, as you say, and pull only the funniest answers and the ones where one person answers correctly?

      I bet it's more like this: if you run into the camera crew on the street and they want to interview you, you know you're going to have to act stupid to be on the show. So you pretend to be stupid. I wouldn't call that scripted. Faked maybe. But not by the producers.

    11. Re:Honestly, though... by STrinity · · Score: 1

      Even if Jaywalking isn't scripted, it's definitely edited. If you spend several hours posing simple questions to random people, you're bound to get enough dumb answers to fill a five minute segment.

      --
      Les Miserables Volume 1 now up with my reading of
    12. Re:Honestly, though... by localhost00 · · Score: 1

      Uh, have we forgotten which state Jay Leno performs his show in?

      --

      Calling atheism and agnosticism a religion is like calling bald a hair color.

    13. Re:Honestly, though... by AbbyNormal · · Score: 1

      Personally, I prefer Conan and Triumph....because your post is good for me to POOP on.

      Seriously, don't all of those shows take place in LA anyways?

      --
      Sig it.
    14. Re:Honestly, though... by Jerf · · Score: 1

      Read more carefully. The answer to your question lies in my post, since I anticipated that point.

    15. Re:Honestly, though... by JohnnyComeLately · · Score: 1
      Triumph the wonder dog. Man, he's the only funny thing on late night anymore (out of the BIG 3, NBC/CBS/ABC). That and the parodies, where Conan puts the face of some celeb/former dictator and animates the mouth in a mock interview.

      But they hardly show Triumph on anymore. Maybe my moods/maturity have changed....but Conan, Letterman, and Leno just seem overdone. If you've seen a dozen, you've seen them all. I watched Johnny Carson for my entire childhood/teenage years and never got tired of him. Now I prefer the Daily Show on Comedy Central ( as well as Dave Chappel and Snoop Dog's Televizzle (sp?)).

      I think Conan, the Daily Show, and Letterman would take exception to the comment, "all of those take place in LA." :-)

    16. Re:Honestly, though... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is it? I reread your post twice and didn't find an answer... To restate, and obviously this isn't a really important question, but I was just wondering: How can you be so sure the show is scripted? Because I think people are more than happy to pretend--spontaneously--to be stupid in order to get on the air.

      Hell, I would. (I probably wouldn't even have to pretend.)

    17. Re:Honestly, though... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      because theres three people who get asked questions. lets say theres 20 questions total. one of the three people has a correct answer, the other two are wrong. so even if you were bullshitting just to get on tv, youd still have to answer a question right every now and then, as would the other two people. and yet only one person only has the correct answer each time, so it HAS to be scripted so that only one person has the correct answer. even if youre answers are all bullshit, theyre going to say 'ok, now you are going to answer the next 4 questions correctly'.

    18. Re:Honestly, though... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No. Thanks to the magic of television, it is possible to tape, say, 100 question/answers per person, and then select the 20 from those in which only one of the three got the answer right. There's no rule saying that every answer has to be broadcast.

  50. The HORRORS!!! by RicochetRita · · Score: 0

    For more info on the horrors of this highly dangerous substance, which is undoubtedly in your neighborhood, nay Your very house, read: this expose' website!

    --
    Stuff that matters: circuitbreakers, vacuum-cleaners coffee makers, calculators generators, matching salt+pepper shakers
  51. Water by rufey · · Score: 0, Offtopic
    A friend of mine in grad school years ago wrote this nice little poem about dihydrogen monoxide.
    It can drown you,
    It can suffocate you,
    It can boil you,
    It can steam you,
    It can freeze you,
    It can crush you,
    It can tear you apart,
    And without it
    you'll die.
  52. GULLIBLE! by JoeLinux · · Score: 1

    I hope this shows up some of the actual "research" that goes on before some of our duly-elected officials vote to restrict things "for the children".

    C'mon people, when you restrict car's emissions but allow barges to come in unchecked, you aren't really helping me breath easier. (FYI, each barge that comes into port at Long Beach and Los Angeles puts more pollution in the air than just over a million cars.)

  53. A sad example of our times by tribulation2004 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Funny, as a teenager I always thought of myself as being a lot more intelligent than the average adult (much to their chagrin) - and up until now (as I approach 30) I haven't seen much evidence showing I was wrong. I'm constantly running into cashiers who cannot make change without their cash register, salespeople who have no clue about the products they are selling, people who can barely spell (a visit to nearly any chat board is enough to turn my stomach). Seems like despite all the progress we seem to be making, the bottom half (two-thirds?) of our population seems to be regressing further and further. My Grandfather (who had to quit school in grade two to help his Dad on the farm) has writing and math skills that make him look like a scholar relative to the average McDonald's cashier with a high school diploma.
    I think our approach to designing products aimed at the lowest common denominator might actually be responsible for all of this. Think about it the next time you pick up a cup of coffee with a warning on it stating that coffee is hot. If a paralegal (a "research expert" if you will) can be fooled by a smart 14-year old, what does that say about our society?

    1. Re:A sad example of our times by c13v3rm0nk3y · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I'm not sure one can blame education or general intelligence for this -- at least not directly.

      What we may have lost is the ability to detect bullshit. The tendency seems to be for adults to accept official looking information presented in an expected manner, or to believe statements from someone holding a microphone in front of a video camera.

      I say "adults" only because I've seen a few "man on the street" spoofs where adults are caught up while their children look on in disbelief just before calling bullshit on the so-called interviewer. Some of Rick Mercer's "Talking to Americans" segments are particularly memorable examples.

      Of course, this is completely anecdotal on my part. Not to mention some of the folks who got caught on this particular hoax were young adults. Adult enough, perhaps, to start believing what "experts" suggest to them without thinking critically about what is being presented to them.

      The problem is a lack of critical thinking, I suggest, and not some arbitary level of intelligence (which is impossible to measure and compare, anyway).

      Examples about making change or spelling may be a bit misleading. I've never been strong with arithmetic (not mathematics) even though I worked for years in the service industry. I never learned the tricks and shortcuts people use to quickly calculate change or percentages. I'm not sure there is much my schooling could have provided to help this. After 35 years I just know I should use a calculator, and check my figures twice.

      Many people find spelling problematic. Especially English spelling, which is hardly a normalized language; being a good English speller requires a fair amount of sheer memorization. In fact, new research suggests that some so-called learning disabilities have almost nothing to do with intelligence or ability to learn. Dyslexics have different brains that may actually be better at some tasks than non-dyslexic brains. Dyslexics can read and comprehend letters and words the same as everyone else, but the part of the brain the recognizes words shapes and establishes a lexicon "buffer" is the problem.

      --
      -- clvrmnky
    2. Re:A sad example of our times by elmegil · · Score: 1
      people who can barely spell (a visit to nearly any chat board is enough to turn my stomach)

      So what the hell are you doing here?

      --
      7 November 2006: The day Americans realized corruption and incompetence weren't addressing 11 September 2001
    3. Re:A sad example of our times by tribulation2004 · · Score: 1

      You're making/repeating excuses for a relatively new phenomena. For example, the problem of making change is just not something that existed even 20 years ago - it's simple subtraction! If you hand me a $20 bill for a $16.22 purchase, all I have to do is subtract 1622 from 2000 and put the decimals back in! The problem is that at some point schools started allowing students to solve elementary problems with calculators. I've taken advanced university physics courses where students were using calculators to for everything from calculating very complicated formulas to adding numbers like 16 and 43. Just weird...
      >Especially English spelling, which is hardly a normalized language; being a good English speller requires a fair amount of sheer memorization.
      Okay, then why is the average 50 year old with a high school education a much better English speller than the average 25 year old graduate student? You're using faulty logic. English has always been English - we're just worse at it using it now (incidentally, English is an absolute breeze compared to French - which we have to learn simultaneously up here in Quebec, Canada). The problem is that mediocrity is now tolerated, and so the bar is constantly being lowered.

    4. Re:A sad example of our times by MythMoth · · Score: 1


      And yet, as you approach thirty, you seem not to have mastered the art of the paragraph.

      We all think we're smart. Nobody is competent to assess their own intelligence.

      --
      --- These are not words: wierd, genious, rediculous
    5. Re:A sad example of our times by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 1
      I'm constantly running into cashiers who cannot make change without their cash register,

      My favorite:

      Cashier: That'll be $7.17.
      Me: Here you go. (hands over $12.27 - a ten, two ones, a quarter, and two pennies.
      Cashier: Ummm, you gave me too much money.
      Me: That's OK. (stands there expectantly)
      Cashier: (giving up and typing $12.27 into the register and realizing that I refactored my change from $2.83 to a $5 bill and a dime) Oh....

      People are shocked to find that some other people do arithmetic in their head, without a calculator or anything!

      --
      Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
    6. Re:A sad example of our times by KnightStalker · · Score: 1
      Okay, then why is the average 50 year old with a high school education a much better English speller than the average 25 year old graduate student?

      I'm not sure your example is correct, but if it is, I'd say the 50 year old has 25 years of extra spelling experience. People have been saying "mediocrity is tolerated these days" for, oh, the last 4000 years or so.

      --
      * And remember, it's spelled N-e-t-s-c-a-p-e, but it's pronounced "Mozilla."
    7. Re:A sad example of our times by mwood · · Score: 1

      I suspect some of it is that we've had the ability to goggle and say, "you *must* be joking!" socialized out of us. It feels impolite to point out to someone that what he's just said is utter hogwash.

    8. Re:A sad example of our times by tribulation2004 · · Score: 1

      Touche... Although I'd like to at least argue in my defense that slashdot strips out paragraph spacing if you don't use line break tags (which your comment forced me to examine).

      Thanks

    9. Re:A sad example of our times by Abcd1234 · · Score: 1

      You're making/repeating excuses for a relatively new phenomena. For example, the problem of making change is just not something that existed even 20 years ago - it's simple subtraction!

      Bah, why even bother with subtraction? Typical change counting is done by *adding*, which is, for most people, even easier. Just start from 16.22 and grab 78 cents, you're now at 17.00. Now grab 3 bucks, and you're done. Why this is so difficult for some is beyond me...

    10. Re:A sad example of our times by Abcd1234 · · Score: 1
      Which is not the case if you use "Plain Old Text" mode, which results in your newline being auto-translated into
      tags while still allowing you to using HTML where necessary. So, you can just hit newline twice

      to start a new paragraph, or you can use <br><br>

      or even <p>

      if you prefer. But, you probably already new that. Right, Mr. Smart Guy?

    11. Re:A sad example of our times by Kupek · · Score: 1

      Reality check: you're making the assumption that this data point reveals a trend.

    12. Re:A sad example of our times by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Remember an '80s band called Devo? Their name referred to the devolution of mankind: as the more intelligent among us choose to have few or no kids (because the planet is full, they realize how much it costs, they realize what a terrible place it is, ...), the unwashed/uneducated/trailer-trash/... continue to have large families. Thus the dumb genes overwhelm the smart genes and thus we devolve.

    13. Re:A sad example of our times by RexCelestis · · Score: 1
      How is this comparison made? What measure can we look at to compare how well people calculate change now versus 20 years ago? All acedotes aside, this is just not verifiable.

      If we go back far enough, the standards change altogether. Andrew Jackson, I believe, thought a person who could figure out only one way to spell a word lacked creativity and intelligence.

      This sound like the time honored tradition of one generation bitching about the next.

      RexCelestis
      Nothing fades as fast as the future
      Nothing clings like the past

    14. Re:A sad example of our times by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "I think our approach to designing products aimed at the lowest common denominator might actually be responsible for all of this. Think about it the next time you pick up a cup of coffee with a warning on it stating that coffee is hot."

      I'm not sure about product design. As a business my goal is to sell more product, at the highest price. User competence is only taken into account when it has an effect on that goal.

      That said, I think warning labels originate more from litigation than lack of intelligence.

    15. Re:A sad example of our times by c13v3rm0nk3y · · Score: 1

      I'm not making excuses for anything, especially any "new phenomena" (I'm not sure what you are referring to). People learn differently, and your assertion that one simply needs to learn some single technique is logically flawed.

      Many people who cannot do arithmetic in their heads as fast as you are obviously not just unaware how to do so. These are just the mechanics of subtraction or spelling. By assuming that your way of solving a particular problem is the obvious correct solution, you are commiting a logical fallacy. Saying "subtraction is easy because all you have to do is subtract" is called a tautology. Your example uses scaling. Those of us who cut our teeth on integer math in embedded systems are already familiar with that technique. The fact is that it never helped me make change for a $20 under some circumstances, even though I'd been doing scalar integer math (keeping track of the decimal point programmatically when displaying values) for years.

      I learned the standard way that grocers, shopkeepers and waiters have done for years: I counted up to 20. Nobody taught me that in school. Maybe this way makes no sense to you. Fair enough. However, assuming this method is the best and only technique for quickly making change is wrong.

      It is a proven fact that our brains learn differently as we age and across populations. You might want to research why it is often easier for children to learn new languages -- often as easy as learning their native language. This is generally not so for adults.

      Perhaps you may want to revisit my original reply. I was engaging you in something called a "discourse". Since neither of us have real proof at our fingertips (you have only offered anecdotal evidence to suggest people are getting worse schooling), I was not simply disagreeing just to disagree. You may find upon rereading that I was simply adding to the conversation, and suggested that falling for a hoax seems unlikely to be related to how easily one makes change for a $20 or spells "terminology"; I thought it might be more related to a general lack of critical thinking. Especially as I know many people who are excellent critical thinkers and yet have always had trouble remembering how to spell words. They know what the words mean. They just can't readily bring the word form to mind, and English absolutely sucks if you need to figure out a word based on rules. What language is the root of the word in? Does any prefix or suffix match this root language? Is it a word that is an exception that proves the rule? Is it one of those words where the pronunciation is completely alien to the spelling?

      My only point was that these kinds of problems are complex. While it is easier to suggest that everyone is getting dumber, or that schools are getting worse, it is more likely that there are a combination of factors involved in how people learn and use this learning across a lifetime.

      You may also want to revisit your statement about English. It is well established that English is hard to teach as a second language when compared with French or (especially) German. There are a variety of word form and grammar rules in English that are a result of it's recent mongrel history. English is not static, and has recently (given the age of languages) changed drastically in very unexpected ways. Romanized languages that adhere more closely with their earlier latinate (or germanic) roots tend to be easier to learn, as there is less reliance on memory for all the exceptions.

      Yes, hailing from Manitoba originally, I learned French along with English in school. I find it interesting that we learned series of verb forms in French, but did not do so for English, even though I lived in a bilingual area where some students knew very little English.

      Show me a reference that proves that "the average 50 year old with a high school education a much better English speller than the average 25 year old graduate student". I'm a fantastic speller with a pretty large

      --
      -- clvrmnky
    16. Re:A sad example of our times by c13v3rm0nk3y · · Score: 1

      Especially so (in my experience) when the source is holding a microphone, or appears to be official.

      I've tried to have Sagan's Baloney Detector handy for situations like these.

      --
      -- clvrmnky
    17. Re:A sad example of our times by mandalayx · · Score: 1

      The problem is a lack of critical thinking, I suggest, and not some arbitary level of intelligence (which is impossible to measure and compare, anyway).

      Actually, Americans are quite good at critical thinking. But that is the ONLY type of thinking we are taught in schools. Have you considered that there are other types of thinking? Suppose we were taught the way of thinking that makes things possible instead of slapping things down or merely making evaluations of the subject.

      It's like being criticized and having people say "you suck" without any clue as to how to improve the situation.

      If interested, there is a guy named Edward De Bono who has written on the subject...

    18. Re:A sad example of our times by tribulation2004 · · Score: 1

      Well stated. I do not disagree with your assertion that there are many ways to solve a problem, and that optimal algorithm for me is not necessarily the same as it is for you. I think I'm being misunderstood though, my basic point being that many of the skills upon which we supposedly build are being forgotten. Using a calculator to add two numbers is fine if it is simply a faster solution - using a calculator to add two numbers because that is the only way a person knows how strikes me as revealing a severe problem in the way people are now being taught.

      The fundamental disagreement here actually seems to be related to how to measure intelligence. I seem to be stating that some of the measures that could be used to roughly estimate intelligence would be basic math skills, language skills, etc. Let's call it an IQ test or SAT approach. You seem to be saying that measuring basic intelligence is more complex - which I tend to disagree with. You are surely correct in saying that to quantify intelligence, and battery of factors need to be considered. I'm saying that to get a rough idea (let's say 90% confidence level), a few basic factors could be considered.

      But my basic point about intelligence was never about the fact that "we are somehow getting dumber" - I believe quite the opposite in fact. My belief is that the divide between relative intelligence levels is widening. I knew exactly what you were referring to when you used words like tautology and scaling - but those are words I would never use in conversation, because I believe that the vocabulary of the bottom half of the population (intelligence-wise, however you wish to measure it) is not sufficiently large enough understand what I was saying.

      To move off-topic though, what do you think of the idea of information overload, and dulled sensitivity? I'm starting to wonder if perhaps (what I perceive to be) falling math and vocabulary skills wouldn't be better attributed to (what I perceive to be) to quickened pace of life that most people live. As I get older, I'm definitely noticing that my own capacity to focus on things is diminishing - I sometimes wonder if it's because of the number of tasks that I attempt to manage at the same time... (He says while running a compile in the background, listening to music and a conversation, surfing/posting on Slashdot and checking his e-mail... :)

    19. Re:A sad example of our times by ces · · Score: 1

      What I find even more shocking is the utter inability to write displayed by co-workers daily in various documents and email. Supposedly most of them have graduated from high school if not college.

      While I don't expect correct spelling, punctuation, or grammar in email it shouldn't read as if it was written by a dyslexic third-grader. Especially when that email is copied to someone outside the company.

      I would expect more formal documents like interoffice memos, product roadmaps, marketing plans, draft documentation, etc. to show somewhat more care in their preparation. Unfortunately many documents appeared to be written just as poorly as some of the emails were prior to being autocorrected by Microsoft Word.

      Supprisingly the worst examples seem to come from people in sales, marketing, or upper management. Those with the best writing ablility other than the technical writers tend to be the programmers or technical support represenatives.

      --
      Happy Fun Ball is for external use only.
    20. Re:A sad example of our times by c13v3rm0nk3y · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure I understand, or agree.

      Critical thinking is not about taking a contrary position just for the sake of doing so.

      When one talks about critical thinking, definitions are often something like this. A good working definition is "regarding novel ideas with a dose of healthy scepticism."

      It's about keeping your baloney detection kit handy. This can guard against getting taken by hoaxes.

      Which was why I brought it up in this context.

      --
      -- clvrmnky
    21. Re:A sad example of our times by c13v3rm0nk3y · · Score: 1
      ...using a calculator to add two numbers because that is the only way a person knows how strikes me as revealing a severe problem in the way people are now being taught.

      True enough. Defaulting to using a calculator without knowing what it does (on a human scale) is certainly dangerous crutch. I'm not sure that this model works for our simple examples we've been using (i.e., finding the difference between two values). Most people know they need to make change when handed a $20. They just haven't learned how to do so when under pressure from a co-worker or customer (which is my problem -- I just forget how the numbers work). It certainly applies when one can solve complex equations with a graphing calculator and not know how to actually simplify and solve a differencial equation.

      I have a math prof friend who just reframes test questions like this to force students to actually prove they know what they are solving for.

      As far as measuring something we call "intelligence", I'll have to respectfully disagree. We can test for compentency at certain skills (solving math or arithmetic problems, iterating over verb forms, remembering how to spell certain words). These can test a certain breadth or depth of knowledge about subjects one can devise tests for. There is a lot of controversy over the idea that any of these tests measure anything we can call intelligence.

      During the last century there has been a push for an index or measure of intelligence, and many tests devised to ascertain this index based on standardized tests. It's surprising how terribly these endeavours have failed. I'm not saying that we can't use tests to get an idea of where someone stands in a particular subject, especially if we use these results to reframe how a subject is taught to individuals (and then reframe the question -- an important loop to close). I'm saying that using these results to build a picture of general intelligence (for any reasonable definition of intelligence, which is a challenge all it's own) is probably doomed.

      By the way, I'm really getting a lot of these ideas from Gould's "The Mismeasure of Man". He traces the history of science looking for the elusive "Q" -- an index of intelligence along one or more curves -- from phrenology to modern bell-curve testing methods.

      ...but those are words I would never use in conversation, because I believe that the vocabulary of the bottom half of the population (intelligence-wise, however you wish to measure it) is not sufficiently large enough understand what I was saying.

      Interestingly enough, I posted a screed on another community that touches on this. I tend to assume that the people I talk with will get what I mean, and ask if they don't. I feel it's part of the social contract. My end of the bargain is to not use language as a weapon to divide and obscure. Anyway, when someone calls bullshit on me, it forces me to look in the dictionary and make sure I know what the hell I'm saying.

      To move off-topic though, what do you think of the idea of information overload, and dulled sensitivity?

      I actually heard of a study somewhere that seemed to indicate that as we get older, our ability to concentrate and divide our attention diminishes. I'm a famous multi-tasker as well, but I do have to block-out more mental space when I really have to concentrate. I tend to use music to blot out the outside worls when coding, though if I have a really hard bug I sometimes have to just have silence, and no Slashdot, either.

      Today, I'm just putting off work because I'm bored.

      --
      -- clvrmnky
    22. Re:A sad example of our times by BollocksToThis · · Score: 1

      Maybe he enjoys the sensation of his stomach turning?

      --
      This sig is part of your complete breakfast.
    23. Re:A sad example of our times by nuklearfusion · · Score: 1

      I think that a lot of the math-related issues are because people use a wonderful invention called a calculator once they hit upper levels of math. For example, from algebra on, I used a calculator for just about any problem I came across, barring, maybe 1+1. Besides, everyone knows that technology is more reliable then people are :)

      --

      There's no such thing as a stupid question, but there sure are a lot of inquisitive idiots.

  54. Re:The funny thing is, DHMO isn't even the right n by The+One+KEA · · Score: 1

    I believe so - prefixes on leading elemental names are usually missing. Take H3PO4, phosphoric acid - it's elemental name is hydrogen phosphate, not trihydrogen phosphate.

    Either way though I think it's hairsplitting, really.

    --
    SCREW THE ADS! http://adblock.mozdev.org/ Proud user of teh Fox of Fire - Registered Linux User #289618
  55. Took them long enough by fantastic+max · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The DHMO site is at least 6 years old. I used to have it linked on my science education web site. I was smart enough to put it under the category of "weird science" or "science humor". Can't remember which as it is no longer active. Thought it was funny and didn't think anyone would ever buy into it... well anyone who actually graduated the 7th grade, at least.

    1. Re:Took them long enough by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      More like 10 years -- Virtually the second site I *ever* saw on the World Wide Web was a DHMO site -- and that was in 1994.

  56. Inability to think... by Phisbut · · Score: 1

    This world's worst defect is its inability to think. Soooo many urban legends, and so many folks warning you of stupid stuff.

    When was the last time a cousin or an in-law sent you an email warning you of that "super-strong" computer virus that McAfee doesn't yet know about, or about Microsoft deleting every user account that does not forward this email.

    If somebody wrote it, then it must be true!!!

    BTW, I wrote this comment, so you better believe it to be true.

    --
    After 3 days without programming, life becomes meaningless
    - The Tao of Programming
  57. Bullshit!!! by skyhawker · · Score: 1

    Don't these guys watch Penn and Teller?

    --

    The best diplomat I know is a fully activated phaser bank.
    -- Scotty.
  58. The fifty-ninth grade by Chillum · · Score: 5, Funny
    "...researching the gullibility of fifty ninth graders."

    You'd think when they'd been in school THAT long, they wouldn't be so gullible!

    1. Re:The fifty-ninth grade by RichardX · · Score: 1

      Fifty Ninth grade is plenty long enough to have gullibility pummeled into you by the edumacashun system. Chances are that a group of 3th graders would've been a bit more canny....

      --
      Curiosity was framed. Ignorance killed the cat.
  59. Ban by 0x41 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I think the first thing they should ban is that paralegal, from ever having access to politicians enough to convince them of crap like that.

    But, Seriouslly, they really should ban styrofoam cups, those things take forever to degrade, and are nasty pollutants. USe paper cups instead!

    1. Re:Ban by brokenbeaker · · Score: 1

      Sure, use paper, and clear cut a few more chunks of the forests (book review of "Virtual Clearcut" about life in Prince George with a clearcut visible from space.)

      Why not use your own ceramic/plastic/glass mug?

  60. but.... by Roger+Keith+Barrett · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You shouldn't take ANY document at face value... it doesn't matter if it's on the web or not.

    this isn't an Internet thing... get a grip.

    --

    Why don't you embrace your slashbotness instead of living in a dreamworld?
    1. Re:but.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Bingo.

      How many people have "discovered" critical thinking because of the internet? Maybe trolls are doing the lords work. Fisher of men indeed.

  61. Not any more, he's not... by Anne_Nonymous · · Score: 0

    >> who was researching the gullibility of fifty ninth graders

    1. Re:Not any more, he's not... by dicepackage · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Obviously the fourth graders trying to outsmart the fifth graders.

  62. Oh? by ackthpt · · Score: 1
    This was our favorite topic at dinner last night. It's amazing what people will believe without looking up facts on their own.

    And clever you, you were probably sucking down a dangerous quantities of Hydrogen Hydroxide at the time!

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
  63. Professionally designed? Please. by Zigg · · Score: 1

    The funny bit is, if I saw a site designed like that, regardless of its content, I'd immediately be suspicious. Either it's a prank, or a tinfoil hat brigade affiliate, or something backed by an army of ambulance chasers...

  64. Cake: The Drug by spoodie · · Score: 1

    This reminds me of a MP in the UK - David Amess - asking questions in the House of Commons about a fictious drug called 'cake', a bright yellow pill about one foot across that featured on the News spoof show "The Day Today".

    --
    I don't need a compass to tell me which way the wind shines.
    1. Re:Cake: The Drug by meadowsp · · Score: 1

      Was actually on brass eye. Near enough the same thing though.

  65. Nah. The really deadly stuff by Moderation+abuser · · Score: 4, Funny

    Hydroxylic acid...

    It makes dihydrogen monoxide look like water in comparison...

    --
    Government of the people, by corporate executives, for corporate profits.
    1. Re:Nah. The really deadly stuff by nallen · · Score: 3, Informative

      now get your chemical nomenclature right: it's hydrohydroxic acid.

      Just like HCl is hydrochloric acid and not Chloric Acid...

    2. Re:Nah. The really deadly stuff by zhenlin · · Score: 1

      H_2SO_4 is Sulphuric acid not Hydrosulphuric acid, nor Hydrosulphate acid nor Hydrosulphuric oxide acid.

      It probably has to do with the fact that H_2O + SO_2 => Sulphuric acid; and H_2 + Cl_2 => Hydrochloric acid.

    3. Re:Nah. The really deadly stuff by SiMac · · Score: 4, Informative

      HCl is hydrochloric acid because it doesn't involve a polyatomic ion. HClO3 is chloric acid, which does involve a polyatomic ion. However, since hydroxide (OH-) is a polyatomic, it is hydroxic acid.

    4. Re:Nah. The really deadly stuff by nallen · · Score: 1

      Sulfuric acid comes under the rules of naming polyatomic anion acids. hydrosulfuric acid is H2S.
      HCl is namded as such because simple binary acids are named that way. It has nothing to do with water reactivity. Hydro is used to indicate oxidation state of the anion. Chloric acid is HClO3

    5. Re:Nah. The really deadly stuff by nallen · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      It's actually a simple binary of Hydrogen and oxygen, so Hydrogen oxide is more correct.

      I like hydrohydroxic acid because it's the term we used when talking to my old college president, a lawyer, who agreed that is was quite dangerous. He was quite the classic lawyer... that shithead.

    6. Re:Nah. The really deadly stuff by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, on top of all that it's to methanol what methanol is to ethanol and we all know how toxic even methanol is compared to booze..

  66. Re:Urban legend? by jamus · · Score: 1

    Many years ago, in my communications class in high school, somebody presented this article (or a similiar one) as fact. Nobody else in the class, including the teacher and the person presenting the article, caught on to what dihydrogen monoxide was. This is the sad state of public education in Conway, Arkansas.

  67. I sware to you, A long time ago. by thbigr · · Score: 1, Interesting

    This was the first web page I ever read and fell off my chair. The "pro" web site is just as funny.

    --
    Come the revolution, the Bourgeois, Capitalistic, "A PARKING STICKER HOLDERS", will be first against the wall!
  68. Re:For those who are missing the joke... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Hehe, now I get it!!

    yes I am Californian :( Astala Vista... Baby

  69. *sigh* by purduephotog · · Score: 1

    California attempts ban on Dihydrogen Monoxide - Monday March 15, @08:47AM, rejected.

    Posted some time ago.

    1. Re:*sigh* by nomadic · · Score: 1

      Ze news, she must be finely aged for here.

  70. There's a sucker born every minute... by alberk · · Score: 1

    What was it P.T. Barnum said? oh yeah... ...ok, so it was Hannum that actually said it, but...

  71. My new career: Supermodel by Futurepower(R) · · Score: 5, Funny


    I learned a lot from the recent election in California. I learned that you can get a job even when you have no qualifications. So, I've decided to be a supermodel.

    1. Re:My new career: Supermodel by aukaru · · Score: 1

      I learned a lot from the recent election in California. I learned that you can get a job even when you have no qualifications


      Yeah, that's just wrong. In the past lack of qualifications restricted you to Congress.

    2. Re:My new career: Supermodel by AbbyNormal · · Score: 1

      Yeah, people PAY you to keep your clothes on.

      --
      Sig it.
  72. Just Goes To Show by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... how far the Left in the US will go to control the lives of everyone they can.

  73. also... by Perianwyr+Stormcrow · · Score: 1

    cats instinctively fear getting doused in it.

    --

    What we call folk wisdom is often no more than a kind of expedient stupidity.-Edward Abbey

  74. Re:Urban legend? by thparker · · Score: 1
    On slashdot, this IS considered informative, since 95% of the people don't RTFA. Of course, this percentage increases to nearly 100% when looking at just the population of slashdot editors.

    tp
    ...who, of course, did not RTFA...

  75. Research = finding arguments to boost your point by ArseneLuppin · · Score: 1
    Methinks, this is more a case of first drawing a conclusion and then trying to find matching arguments, rather than a case of naive gullibility:
    "The measure has been pulled from the agenda, although Norman said the city may still eventually ban foam cups. If you get Styrofoam into the water and it breaks apart, it's virtually impossible to clean up," Norman said.
    Wanna bet the assignment to the paralegal was "the campaign contribution of mumble-mumble-large-styrofoam-cup-manufacturer was somewhat lacking. Research the internet and find reasons why should ban styrofoam cups".

    Unluckily enough, the paralegal then found the one reason that made everybody laugh...

  76. DHMO? by jnievele · · Score: 1

    Ok, maybe I'm missing something here... but IMHO:

    a) Styrofoam cups should be banned anyway because they don't decompose (as opposed to cardboard cups)

    and b) Styrofoam isn't made from H2O, but from polystyrene...

    1. Re:DHMO? by pclminion · · Score: 1
      Styrofoam cups should be banned anyway because they don't decompose (as opposed to cardboard cups)

      Steel also doesn't decompose, shall we ban it?

      Styrofoam isn't made from H2O, but from polystyrene...

      And why is polystyrene bad? Because it's used to make styrofoam cups? That argument is circular.

      I agree with you that styrofoam cups are wasteful, but there are hundreds of other products we also use which do as much or more damage to the environment, yet we don't seem to worry about those. Zip-loc bags? Those stupid "Swiffer" disposable mops? Plastic eating utensils? The computer you are currently typing on is much more dangerous to the environment than a styrofoam cup. If you ingested some of the compounds used to manufacture it you would die.

      Styrofoam was originally picked as a "taboo" material in the 80's-90's because it was manufactured with CFCs. It's made a different way now.

      Can we please concentrate on things that have real environmental impacts instead of selecting silly little things to "fix" and getting all emotional about them?

    2. Re:DHMO? by jnievele · · Score: 1

      > Steel also doesn't decompose, shall we ban it?

      But it does - it rusts.

      > And why is polystyrene bad?

      It's a waste of fossil fuel and it's rarely recycled. It fills up landfills.

      That's reason enough not to use it, considering that better alternatives are readily available. Sure, a lot of other stuff is even worse than a single styrofoam cup - but how many computers get thrown away every day? Compared to the number of styrofoam cups thrown away?

    3. Re:DHMO? by pclminion · · Score: 1
      Don't misunderstand me: I'm not advocating the use of styrofoam. It's a wasteful substance, and it typifies the disgusting, wasteful habits of the average first-world citizen. However, targetting styrofoam is not going to help anything, and it actually distracts from the real, significant environmental problems on this planet.

      It's a waste of fossil fuel

      It's nowhere near as wasteful as each person in the U.S. owning their own car. Imagine the impact on fossil fuel usage if we all took buses or trains everywhere.

      it's rarely recycled

      This is a general problem with people's consciousness of environmental problems. It has nothing specifically to do with styrofoam.

      It fills up landfills.

      It's far better to have that carbon tied up in the form of styrofoam in some landfill somewhere, than to have it out in the atmosphere in the form of CO2 contributing to the greenhouse effect. If all the CO2 emissions from industry could somehow be converted into styrofoam, that would be an amazing environmental improvement. Then we could just bury the styrofoam and forget about it. That carbon was originally buried in the first place, in the form of fossil hydrocarbons. We'd be returning it to the state it was in originally, except it's chemically different. So what? It's inert. (This is for the sake of example. In reality, we'd use some other substance, not styrofoam, but the concept is identical.)

      Sure, a lot of other stuff is even worse than a single styrofoam cup - but how many computers get thrown away every day?

      A LOT. Apparently you've never seen an electronics recycling center. Go check one out. Then, imagine how many other computers are just being trashed instead of recycled.

      Compared to the number of styrofoam cups thrown away?

      The comparison doesn't matter. Styrofoam takes up space and looks ugly. Electronics materials are toxic.

      Look, I care about the health of the planet as much as you do, if not more so. I simply see these feel-good, "Instant Green" (think "Instant Coffee," I mean it in that sense) solutions as doing more harm than good. People think they are doing "their share" in helping the environment by performing all sorts of weird, illogical actions that don't address the actual concerns. They think they've done their part, and go on about their lives without actually improving the situation.

  77. Don't forget the performance enhancing product W by stumpyrider · · Score: 2, Funny

    The latest performance enhancer...Used by even 1st grade athletes.. http://www.sheldonbrown.com/w.html

  78. Not according to Star Trek by Bill,+Shooter+of+Bul · · Score: 1, Informative

    *puts geek hat on*

    But didn't they refer to it as Dilithium or trilithium crystals?

    Star Trek wouldn't be wrong on something so obvious, right?

    *takes geek hat off, and takes a shower, NOT CLEAN!!!*

    --
    Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
    1. Re:Not according to Star Trek by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hope DHM is used in the shower with soap!

    2. Re:Not according to Star Trek by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      But didn't they refer to it as Dilithium or trilithium crystals?

      Please recall from Chemistry that metals cannot form molecules!

  79. Check the .doc metadata... by subVorkian · · Score: 1

    And in an even stranger twist, metadata appearing in documents published by DMHO.org seem to have been written or reviewed by the Paper Cup Political Action Committee (PCPAC).

  80. Chemistry not a required course for Law Degree! by AwesomeJT · · Score: 1

    What can you say. So much head knowledge, so little common sense. Apparently, some colleges don't require even basic Chemistry for Law School. I think this scares the hell out of me. Great experiement on how to fool paralegals.

    --
    SPAM solution made easy: 1 spammer, 5 cords of rope, 5 hourses, and fireworks. Be creative.
  81. Brain cloud? by Mac+Scientist · · Score: 1

    Back in college, we always wondered why the Jello cubes sat on a lettuce leaf instead of just being served on a bare plate. The lettuce was obviously preventing a reaction between the plate and the Jello, which emitted dihydrogen monoxide, aka Jello gas. Colorless, odorless, and you feel fine until dropping dead within 120 years. Sounds like "brain cloud" to me.

  82. The same people by CakerX · · Score: 0

    Theeese are the same sorts of people that said "OK" at the DMCA and the patriot act. Mabey politicians aren't evil and corrupt, they're just plain stupid.

  83. better/safer solution by elykyllek · · Score: 2, Funny

    It would probably be wise for them to avoid dihydrogen monoxide altogether and Buy dehydrated water instead.

    1. Re:better/safer solution by knghtrider · · Score: 1

      I bought a box of dehydrated water once, but I didn't know what to add.

      --
      In America today you can murder land for private profit. You can leave the corpse for all to see, and nobody calls the c
  84. unsafe disposable cups? by fafaforza · · Score: 1

    Putting aside all the nose-upturning and jokes from the oh-so-savvy-and-intelligent Slashdot readers, has there ever been any research into whether plastic and styrophone disposable cups could have a coating of chemicals that could potentially mix with the fluids they held?

    I imageine these cups are made in large plants from various chemicals and can't imagine they would do a thorough job cleaning them.

    And if they did, what would they clean the cups with? Another chemical no doubt.

    1. Re:unsafe disposable cups? by TheLink · · Score: 1

      "And if they did, what would they clean the cups with? Another chemical no doubt."

      dihydrogen oxide?

      --
  85. Re:The funny thing is, DHMO isn't even the right n by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hydrogen Hydroxide is correct. I had assumed that he made up that name for water to throw off anyone who had actually heard the correct chemical name for the compound. I could be mistaken but he seems like a pretty smart kid.

  86. glad I looked at the site last month by Revek · · Score: 1

    I like his notice at the bottom
    URL: http://www.dhmo.org/
    Last Updated: March 16, 2004
    Note: content veracity not implied
    Copyright (C) by Tom Way

    1. Re:glad I looked at the site last month by DLWormwood · · Score: 1
      Note: content veracity not implied

      The funny thing is, that statement shouldn't have been needed. Everything the site says about water being dangerous is absolutely true "from a certain point of view." Water causes drowing, is a carrier of pollutants, thirst causes eventually death, etc. The shear accuracy of the site's content is what makes it so funny; it's the Perfect Troll(TM).

      --
      Those who complain about affect & effect on /. should be disemvoweled
  87. Let me take an unnecessary cheap-shot by Keebler71 · · Score: 1
    Let me help frame this debate - alebit a little off-topic. I was born and raised in the adjacent suburb of Mission Viejo, which despite the obvious Spanish grammar error in its name (Mission is actually an irregular feminine noun in Spanish so it should be Mission Vieja), has tried to honor (perhaps insultingly so) the Spanish influence of the area by giving just about every landmark a Spanish name.

    As an example, I went to Montivideo Elementary, Del Lago Elementary, and Los Alisos Intermediate School. The major roads are Margurite, Los Aliso, La Paz, Alicia, and Oso Parkway (which apparently means 'bear' in Spanish).

    Anyway, apparently, "Oso Pkwy" was not entirely 'snooty' enough for the residents of Aliso Viejo, as they renamed the street "Pacific Park" where it crosses into their city.

    --
    "It takes considerable knowledge just to realize the extent of your own ignorance." - Thomas Sowell
    1. Re:Let me take an unnecessary cheap-shot by Keebler71 · · Score: 1

      woops, the yahoo maps link I posted above did not accurately back-up my post. In the map, click on the word "Oso Pkwy" to recenter and zoom in to see what I am talking about.

      --
      "It takes considerable knowledge just to realize the extent of your own ignorance." - Thomas Sowell
  88. Old joke, maybe? by dthree · · Score: 5, Informative

    They list a 1986 MSDS on the site, and a search confirms the entry. However, a search for the manufacturer points back to the hoax website. I think maybe msdsonline has falled for it, probably through lack of due diligence.

    --
    "I forgot my mantra."
  89. Precious bodily fluids by Roadside+Couch · · Score: 1, Funny

    We must protect our precious bodily fluids from communist plots to poison us and warp the minds of our children. DHMO is the chemical most commonly used to deliver Flourine in our public water supply!

  90. Re:The funny thing is, DHMO isn't even the right n by agent+dero · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Duh, it's a hoax.

    Since when have hoaxes needed accurate info?

    Only geeks or /.'ers would look into something this much, i'm proud to be one of them :-p

    --
    Error 407 - No creative sig found
  91. Better stick to CH3CH2OH by saha · · Score: 1

    Ethyl alcohol is a clear, colorless liquid with a characteristic, agreeable odor. In dilute aqueous solution, it has a somewhat sweet flavor, but in more concentrated solutions it has a burning taste.

  92. Re:The funny thing is, DHMO isn't even the right n by donnyspi · · Score: 1

    This would also mean that "H20" is incorrect as well, should be "HOH". That's what my high school chem teacher said anyway.

  93. Berkeley CA already *does* ban it by wherley · · Score: 1

    Since 1988, Berkeley has an ordinance banning Styrofoam aka polystyrene foam.
    As recently as June 2000 they restated that The City will continue to enforce its Styrofoam ban ordinance.
    Go Berkeley!

  94. Styrofoam is easy to recycle by Stonent1 · · Score: 4, Funny

    I always place it on the head of an unsuspecting river otter and pour acetone on it. It instantly disintegrates and the otter whisks the remains away to a recycling center.

  95. Site gives clue to its "veracity" by mariox19 · · Score: 1

    Right at the bottom of the home page are these words:

    Note: content veracity not implied

    Now, how can anybody with any brains put in motion a legislature without first double-checking the veracity of the content?!

    It's a disgrace!

    --

    quiquid id est, timeo puellas et oscula dantes.

  96. Penn and Teller did a simaliar trick by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Penn and Teller, on thier Showtime show 'Bullshit' did a similair trick to expose the ridiculous ignorance of the liberals at this earth-day type event. They went around and got a tons of signatures from people for thier support in the ban of 'dihydrogen-monoxide'. it was pretty damn funny and it did well in exposing the lack of credibility on the part of these groups.

    1. Re:Penn and Teller did a simaliar trick by scrytch · · Score: 1

      > Penn and Teller, on thier Showtime show 'Bullshit' did a similair trick to expose the ridiculous ignorance of the liberals

      From the same crowd that still derides evolution as "just a theory" ...

      Mmmm hmmm.

      --
      I've finally had it: until slashdot gets article moderation, I am not coming back.
    2. Re:Penn and Teller did a simaliar trick by Elias+Israel · · Score: 1
      From the same crowd that still derides evolution as "just a theory" ...

      You don't know Penn and Teller very well, then.

      You see, they did a show deriding that foolishness as well.

      Nevertheless, it remains the case that pulling that "Dihydrogen Monoxide" trick on fake environmentalist wannabees was devastatingly funny satire.

    3. Re:Penn and Teller did a simaliar trick by egrubs · · Score: 1

      I congratulate you on taking an isolated, unscientific comedy routine and from it extrapoliting the downfall of an ideology.

    4. Re:Penn and Teller did a simaliar trick by scrytch · · Score: 1

      > You don't know Penn and Teller very well, then.

      I do, sort of. The "same crowd" was referring to the dittohead clucking at "those ignorant liberals". Penn and Teller are two of my personal heroes, along with James Randi.

      I'm just wary of the logic that seems to go "There are ignorant silly tree-hugging airheads in the environmental movement, therefore environmentalism is silly airheaded fluff." It's funny how people will pull out the banner of critical thinking to excuse themselves from doing their own.

      I suppose offering a tu quoque ad hominem doesn't exactly support my point either -- but it's not that I was trying to demonstrate anything *but* the apparent credulousness of the messenger (credulity is after all what this thread is about)

      --
      I've finally had it: until slashdot gets article moderation, I am not coming back.
    5. Re:Penn and Teller did a simaliar trick by bani · · Score: 1

      actually the best part is that instead of just calling them "ignorant", they went out and demonstrated it, interviewing the local head of the organization and having them indict themselves with their own words.

      the best part of p&t bs was not that they simply stated how things or people were stupid, they proved it, using the stupid people and stupid things themselves.

  97. Dammit! by jvollmer · · Score: 1
    You're telling me the whole thing is a fake?

    Last week, I bought five anti-DHMO T-shirts off that site.

    If it's not Consolidated Lint, it's just fuzz!

  98. hyponatremia by mec · · Score: 5, Informative

    That's right. Marathon runners are vulnerable to hyponatremia. Massive sweat + intake of unsalted water leads to sodium ion imbalance inside the body. It's one of those nasty conditions where the brain gets disoriented so the victim doesn't realize that they are headed for death.

    Hyponatremia a Concern for Marathon Runners

    I know the Slashdot stereotype is that nobody *here* has to worry about such things, but actually, I bet there are people in the Slashdot community who run this far and this hard.

    1. Re:hyponatremia by drinkypoo · · Score: 3, Interesting

      A friend of mine with a sweating problem drank enough water to do that to himself once. He didn't die though, he just had a seizure, and a free trip to the hospital. When I used to work for Roaring Camp narrow gauge railroad at the tender age of 15 (at which time I was about 6'4") I was the trackwalker, meaning I followed the narrow gauge steam train up the hill to make sure it didn't toss anything out of the firebox or the stack that was going to catch the forest on fire. I drank a lot of water, and I took salt tablets on the hottest days. I don't know if it was necessary, but I'm not dead, and it got well over 100 several times, and I was hauling my chubby ass up hill five times a day on hot, busy days. My only compensation was minimum wage and being in umpteen zillion japanese tourist videos.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    2. Re:hyponatremia by mwood · · Score: 1

      It must be true -- there were some Peanuts strips about it! :-)

    3. Re:hyponatremia by rjstanford · · Score: 1

      Yup - I'm one of them. Its a concern, but not a terribly large one if you take care of it. Running a marathon on pure water is just a bad idea, but if you take care to either drink powerade or take some salt tablets with your water, you should be fine. Powerade is by far the tastier of the two choices, by the way.

      --
      You're special forces then? That's great! I just love your olympics!
    4. Re:hyponatremia by gowen · · Score: 1
      Its a concern, but not a terribly large one if you take care of it.
      Right, and its a pretty small detail relative to the risks of dehydration, too. Given the choice between running a marathon on too much pure water or too little, I'll take my chances with hyponatremia.

      I'll take salty OJ or salty, flat decaff Coke.
      --
      Athletic Scholarships to universities make as much sense as academic scholarships to sports teams.
    5. Re:hyponatremia by GuyFawkes · · Score: 1

      mmm, I used to live in a hot climate (circa 35 celcius daily) and work in engine rooms for a living where the temperature often exceeded 50 celcius, and old guy turned me on to putting a pinch of salt in everything you drank, including beer or water.

      Surprisingly it all tasted good, which just goes to show that like a pregnant woman's "notions" the body often knows best.

      I remember one time I went to a gym with a friend (not a gym goes myself) and did a stiff two hour workout, finished, guzzled must have been a litre of bottled spring water, and ten minutes later threw up harder than any other time of my life apart from when we tried to make sprirts by freeze distilling homebrew.

      --
      http://slashdot.org/~GuyFawkes/journal
    6. Re:hyponatremia by RadioTV · · Score: 1

      I knew someone who died from a water overdose. I worked as an orderly in a locked psych unit while I was in college. We had one patient that was diagnosed with Psychogenic polydipsia. He was brought in after he passed out from an electrolyte imbalance. He spent several months with us while we treated him with anti-psychotics. A few months after he was released he quit taking his meds and drank himself to death.

      --
      I have great faith in fools - self confidence my friends call it. - Edgar Allan Poe
    7. Re:hyponatremia by bhamm · · Score: 1

      That's right. Marathon runners are vulnerable to hyponatremia. Massive sweat + intake of unsalted water leads to sodium ion imbalance inside the body. It's one of those nasty conditions where the brain gets disoriented so the victim doesn't realize that they are headed for death. I know the Slashdot stereotype is that nobody *here* has to worry about such things, but actually, I bet there are people in the Slashdot community who run this far and this hard.

      ..only if chased by the RIAA or CIA, or somesuch organization.. =)

    8. Re:hyponatremia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not only can massive sweating (export of salt and water) plus intake of ONLY water and no salt (ions the body needs for the heart's electrical systems to work) lead to DEATH.

      BUT the simple intake of MASSIVE amounts of water can flush out the body's salts and accomplish the same result : DEATH. A lady in Miami a few years back proved it by doing it (she thought she was "purifying" her body of toxins).

      Yet another example of why "poison" simply means "too much" (to quote my ex-wife's nursing professor).

  99. Ummm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm pretty sure they had this conversation on FARK.com yesterday. The kids webpage was basically copied from another webpage, he did an ALMOST ok job of rearranging it so it's not totally obvious, but just changing the order doesn't help if you still quote word for word. The gag is pretty old, my physics teacher in high school pulled it on us and he said it was pulled on him in college. This was in 99 and he was at in his 50's then, so it must be at least 40 years old. Here is the FARK posting for those too lazy to find it.
    2004-03-15 01:17:28 AM JurorNumber42

    I've had a Ban DMHO web site up for a decade. Heck, before that I had the text up on a Gopher page for several years.

    http://www.zippynet.com/pages/bandhmo.htm

    BTW, the science fair kid that Snopes talks about copied my stuff word for word. Eh, that's whats the interweb's all about, right? /showing my age, but still proud to see DHMO go this far

  100. and a PhD on the city council by sybert · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Even more embarrassing, this is Orange County, not the Bay Area where I would expect this to happen. And I looked at the city council web-site and one of the city council members has a PhD, from Stanford, in Educational Psychology. It only shows how useless a PhD has become.

    1. Re:and a PhD on the city council by chrisbtoo · · Score: 1

      Isn't the Bay Area full of people with PhDs from Stanford? Maybe I'm missing your point.

      --
      Registering accounts later than some other chrisb since 1997
    2. Re:and a PhD on the city council by PonyHome · · Score: 1

      You'd expect this of the Bay area (I assume you mean SF bay, since LA is a bay, also)? You'd expect this in the home of Xerox PARC, Oracle, Apple, PDI, Pixar, Lawrence Livermore, and Cisco? You really expect a high level of gullibility and ignorance here? This is where you have the highest concentrations of geeks and /. readers in the entire state. I'm not sure what happened to Berkeley, but hey -- she bangs, she bangs!

      Just because one of the city council members has a degree from Stanford (a) doesn't mean they are broadly educated, and (b) doesn't mean they were an advocate of the proposed ban.

    3. Re:and a PhD on the city council by orcrist · · Score: 1
      No kidding. Orange County? Since when is that the center of learning and science?

      Berkeley alone has produced over 14 Nobel prize winners, and that was the count in the 80's when I still lived there. Don't mix up kooky political correctness for lack of education. Here's an example from the Census Bureau (excerpt from Original table):

      Percent of People With a Bachelor's Degree or More
      Population 25 Years and Over (County Level):
      Rank County Percent Lower Bound Upper Bound
      8 San Francisco County, CA 47.8 46.6 49.0
      17 San Mateo County, CA 43.0 40.4 45.6
      18 Santa Clara County, CA 42.9 41.3 44.6
      36 Santa Cruz County, CA 40.0 35.7 44.3
      38 Alameda County, CA 39.6 38.0 41.3
      54 Contra Costa County, CA 35.9 33.9 37.9
      The above are all Bay Area. Then we have the top-ranking Southern Californian county:
      69 Orange County, CA 33.0 31.8 34.2
      But these statistics aren't necessary for anyone with more than a passing familiarity with the 2 regions. PonyHome mentions more than enough further examples. I'm just curious why you would expect Orange County of all places to beat the Bay Area in education. Money? maybe. Conservatism? sure. But, education? ROFL.

      -chris

      BTW @PonyHome: There is *no* other "Bay Area"; just areas which have bays. ;-)
      --
      San Francisco values: compassion, tolerance, respect, intelligence
    4. Re:and a PhD on the city council by sybert · · Score: 1
      Add the San Francisco assemblyman, with PhD, trying to legislate feng-shui in the building code to the gullibility list.

      There definitely seems to be a negative correlation between PhD's and good government. Our state also has the worst rated state government and we have to be rescued by an actor with a correspondence degree in economics. I think a lack of real-world experience may be behind this. (the goal of getting a PhD is usually to avoid the real world)

      The gullibility of the above companies and /. readers (myself included) is that we are still here, and have not fled to better states.

    5. Re:and a PhD on the city council by DunbarTheInept · · Score: 1

      The article said the mistake was caught before it actually was going to go before the council for a vote. That means those PhD's you talk about hadn't really seen it yet.

      --

      Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.

  101. sweeping generalizations are often wrong by nomadic · · Score: 1

    Uh is that why we revere English teachers more than doctors, ad writers more than physicists?

    1. Re:sweeping generalizations are often wrong by TheLink · · Score: 1

      Because with fewer than 4 years of English study your spelling and grammar would be like that of 90% of the slashdotters here?

      --
    2. Re:sweeping generalizations are often wrong by swb · · Score: 1

      Doctors are part of the professional class, and have extensive training and a monopoly-like grip on the pharmacopia, so they're able to command high salaries, in addition to being necessary for most people's well being.

      English teachers are too often seen as part of the faceless government bureaucracy and school system and hence don't command respect, while *writers* who actually practice the craft command a great deal of social status, even if they seldom make any money.

      Ad writers, while hated by many, actually make piles of money. An associate creative director in his late 20s with little educational background often makes $150k per year, and the right accounts/firms can push that salary to $300k by his mid 40s.

      A physicist with a fresh Ph.D might make what, $40k in an adjunct faculty position, and maybe $70k or so in an "entry level" research position? The salaries can go high if you get a really good senior research position at a big-name Uni or corporation, but those jobs are often management jobs in practice, with grad students and lab techs doing the day-day work.

    3. Re:sweeping generalizations are often wrong by PantsWearer · · Score: 1
      I'm not sure what country you're from, but my wife, who recently got her PhD in physics, makes just over 50k a year as a postdoc and her salary is far, far above average for a postdoc in the US.

      And, yes, her's is an entry level research position.

      --
      Be glad life is unfair, otherwise we'd deserve all this.
    4. Re:sweeping generalizations are often wrong by swb · · Score: 1

      Most 23 year old copywriters make that as an entry level salary, with little or no educational background (maybe a two-year ad design school).

      By the time they're 35 they'll be hitting $100k++ if they've made it to the next level, associate creative director (despite the title, it really is the next level at least at the agency I work at).

      Seasoned copywriters in the early 40s who make senior creative director positions are often getting $200k in salary and profitability bonuses, which can push their compensation over $250k easily.

  102. law makers don't know math or chemistry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They almost changed Pi by law
    http://www.math.utah.edu/~cherk/Pi-story.html

    Those who can't do - teach
    Those who are too dumb to teach - legistate.

  103. Its on the 'net... by martin · · Score: 1

    So it must be true...

    sigh

    --
    Martin

  104. Re:The funny thing is, DHMO isn't even the right n by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Actually, I think both naming conventions are "correct".

    I suck in Chemistry though, so perhaps someone would correct me.

  105. I live in CA by geek · · Score: 2

    Thing get way more out of whack than this. Like the time Santa Cruz spent 85k on a large road sign only to tear it down the next day because it was ugly. I could go on and on about these people for hours, everything from the traffic to the small town elitists. Ths is possibly one of the most entertaining states in the union.

    Keep in mind however that last year was the first year in this states history that more people left than entered. Obviously these retards have pushed it to far.

    1. Re:I live in CA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Obviously these retards have pushed it too far.

      Embarrasing typos, aisle 3.

    2. Re:I live in CA by 0x0d0a · · Score: 1

      Keep in mind however that last year was the first year in this states history that more people left than entered. Obviously these retards have pushed it to far.

      Are you including Mexican influx?

      Illegal Mexican immigration is not insignificant.

    3. Re:I live in CA by geek · · Score: 1

      You mean illegal immigration? No one counts illegal immigration sorry. Millions of criminals flooding over our border do not count as California residents.

  106. Reminds me of the old poem.. by CrazyTalk · · Score: 0

    Here lies Willy on the floor
    From unknown flasks he'll drink no more
    For what he thought was H2O
    Was really H2SO4

  107. Re:For those who are missing the joke... by DrSkwid · · Score: 1

    mmm monooxide

    ooh they have hidrogen on computers now

    --
    There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
  108. Re:The funny thing is, DHMO isn't even the right n by hcetSJ · · Score: 1

    The point is, everything else in the hoax is accurate. That's part of the joke. Inhalation of H2O can lead to death--it's called drowning. The rest of the facts presented are also accurate, just worded cleverly to catch people.

    --

    This side up.
  109. Orkut community by Molina+the+Bofh · · Score: 1

    Some days ago I created an Orkut community named Coalition Against DHMO.

    You're all invited to join it and discuss this amazing topic.

    --

    -
    Roses are #FF0000, Violets are #0000FF, find / -name '*base*' |xargs chown -R us && mv zig greatjustice
  110. But. by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

    You missed the entire point. A town was going to ban an item because of a creatively written web page on water. Now if that doesn't alert you to there being a slight issue, at least with that town's operation, I don't know what would....

    Personally, I found the story quite funny, it truly brings to light how absolutely gullible some people are. Then again, the lottery would be another example.

    --
    The cesspool just got a check and balance.
  111. Re:The funny thing is, DHMO isn't even the right n by cryptochrome · · Score: 1

    You're probably correct, but Dihydrogen Monoxide carries the all important "two hydrogens, one oxygen", which should be decodable to anyone with high school language skills. Hydrogen hydroxide could fool people who don't know what hydroxide means, and therefore isn't quite as damning.

    --

    ---If you can't trust a nerd, who can you trust?

  112. Re:The funny thing is, DHMO isn't even the right n by Graff · · Score: 4, Informative
    Di-Hydrogen Monoxide isn't the proper name for water. That would imply a H2 ion bonded to a O ion. IIRC, this is not correcct.

    No, it is actually technically correct. (The best kind of correct!) In chemistry naming conventions you usually use this sort of naming convention for binary nonmetal-nonmetal chemicals.

    For example:
    NO2 - nitrogen dioxide
    N2O - dinitrogen monoxide
    N2O5 - dinitrogen pentoxide
    CO2 - carbon dioxide

    So it does make sense to say:
    H2O - dihydrogen monoxide

    However the name hydrogen hydroxide is incorrect since that would indicate that the OH part of HOH (H2O ) is an ion and that the extra hydrogen is ionically bonded to it. This is not the case, in H2O both hydrogens are covalently bonded to the central oxygen atom.

    You can see more about chemical naming conventions here.
  113. Gah. Neva miiind... by pokeyburro · · Score: 1

    The link I had to Street Smarts finally loaded after I'd already posted. Seems they do film around the country.

    --
    Lately democracy seems to be based on the skybox, the Happy Meal box, the X-box, and the idiot box.
  114. BUT IT IS ALL TRUE!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is not some fake information web page. Everything they say about DHMO is factual. Although most people call it water, all the properties that are listed are true.

  115. Re:The funny thing is, DHMO isn't even the right n by DrSkwid · · Score: 2, Funny

    > Either way though I think it's hairsplitting, really.

    nah, that would be H2O2 - hydrogen peroxide

    --
    There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
  116. I laughed for a bit, but then... by twocents · · Score: 1

    I quit laughing when I thought of the fact that we already dump plenty of stuff into the ground that has, at some point, caused much more problems than those mentioned in the fictional research paper.

    Oh well, gotta go to buy a new cell phone because the little piece of plastic on the side broke.

    Sigh...

  117. Feng Shui by stateofmind · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This is also the state that wanted to make Feng Shui a requirement in every CA office.

    Josh

  118. Beach and cubicles Very Dangerous!! by Prince+Vegeta+SSJ4 · · Score: 1

    There are ample amounts of not only Dihydrogen Monoxide, But Silicon Dioxide as well in both places. Some say nerds are at more risk, especially from the latter. Further research indicates that Slashdotters are expecially vulnerable to a very nasty compound from the methylxanthine family

  119. Re:Depends on what you consider "professional" by bearl · · Score: 2, Funny

    You haven't looked at the city's web site then. :-)

    City of Aliso Viejo

  120. It is nasty stuff unless properly diluted by jhines · · Score: 5, Funny

    dihydrogen monoxide is nasty thing, which can harbor bacteria and other nasty things to you.

    It is best to dilute it slightly with ethanol, as this kills the bugs.

    Adding hops, barley, yeast, and letting it mix for a while is a very good way of adding the ethanol.

    1. Re:It is nasty stuff unless properly diluted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The funny thing is that this is exactly true, for a particular period of human civilisation. There was a time when the only safe way to drink water in a settlement was to take it in the form of beer, cider (thank you Johnny Appleseed) or wine. Anything else meant death by cholera or something equally messy.

      Now that's sort of true again, in that we've polluted the heck out of our rivers and lakes. And I'll take a nice local brew over some plastic-bottled water from heck knows where any day.

  121. Dihydrogen Monoxide is water by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    H + H + O is always H2O.
    H2O is water.

    1. Re:Dihydrogen Monoxide is water by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      WHAT! Are you certain? THANKS FOR INFO! I DIDN'T KNOW! Reason: Don't use so many caps. It's like YELLING.

  122. Dihydrogen monoxide just a scapegoat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    After reading the article, it sounds less like the government was fooled by the dangers of "dihydrogen monoxide" and more like they were looking for a reason to ban foam cups...

  123. Re:The funny thing is, DHMO isn't even the right n by kelnos · · Score: 1

    not really. the empirical formula for a molecule doesn't necessarily reflect the bond structure imposed by the component atoms/molecules. for example, consider most hydrocarbons - CxHyOz. to use a similar example, alcohols contain a standard hydrocarbon chain bonded to an OH molecule. you'd still write that using the CxHyOz notation. (damn /. for not allowing the <sub> tag.)

    --
    Xfce: Lighter than some, heavier than others. Just right.
  124. Re:The funny thing is, DHMO isn't even the right n by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For compounds made up of nonmetals, the first element named is the one with lower electronegativity, with the second having the higher electronegativity. If more than one binary compound is formed by a pair of nonmetals, the Greek prefixes di (two), tri (three), tetra (four), penta (five), hexa (six), etc. are used to designate the number of atoms present. The mono- prefix is rarely used.

    Since H and O can form h2o or h2o2, I think dihydrogen oxide would be strictly correct, as it is a covalent binary nonmetal compound.

    http://www.cofc.edu/~deavorj/101/nomenclature.html

  125. Ashland, OR by steveargonman · · Score: 1

    Ashland, OR has a ban on styrafoam..

  126. Re:The funny thing is, DHMO isn't even the right n by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    uhm... if they were ions, then wouldn't it be a "hydrate", or "hydride", or something (or both)?
    I believe that you could follow IUPAC to come up with many other names, however -- how about:
    (alpha)-Hydroxy ... uhm... Hydrogen?
    Hydrogen-Hydroxide?
    nillan-ol? (zero-length alkane base)
    (alpha)-Hydrogen-Hydrate?
    (alpha)-Hydroxy- Hydride?
    Hydronium-de-hydrogen-ate? (throw-back-to-bio-chem)...

    I think that di-hydrogen-mon-oxide has an easier (and slightly more "sinister" ring to it.

  127. Re:The funny thing is, DHMO isn't even the right n by Angry+Black+Man · · Score: 3, Informative

    IAAC...

    The correct name is "dihydrogen oxide". Theres no need to put the "mono" on the oxygen. If you dont believe me, you can look at NIST's chemistry webbook...

    http://webbook.nist.gov/cgi/cbook.cgi?Name=Dihydro gen+oxide&Units=SI

    --
    the byproduct of years of oppression by the white man
  128. disclaimer by kazoosandinstruments · · Score: 1

    wow, the bottom of the page even says, "Note: content veracity not implied" ... :-/

  129. CA environmental stuff is wayyyy over the top by WolfWithoutAClause · · Score: 3, Interesting
    I heard a story from the guys at Experimental Rocket Propulsion Society who were playing with high purity hydrogen peroxide (85% compared to the 3% you typically get in chemists).

    Anyway the inspectors came around to check them out; and insisted on knowing what their cleanup method would be if they spilled the stuff.

    "We don't need one."

    At this point the inspector went into rant mode, threatening extensive punitive penalties if a cleanup methodology wasn't produced immediately.

    ... which was terminated only when the team pointed out that hydrogen peroxide, of this strength, when spilled on the local desert, immediately "pssssssssh" decomposed into a) steam b) oxygen... and they merely asked if they needed to worry about either contaminating the local groundwater. Upon careful consideration, the official waived this requirement, and elected not to penalise them.

    (Indeed so effective was the desert at catalysing the peroxide, the team were jokingly considering abandoning their expensive silver catalysts, and using desert instead... but I digress.)

    --

    -WolfWithoutAClause

    "Gravity is only a theory, not a fact!"
    1. Re:CA environmental stuff is wayyyy over the top by mwood · · Score: 1

      Now, that is *really* scary.

    2. Re:CA environmental stuff is wayyyy over the top by Sebastopol · · Score: 1

      And thus another urban legend is born. Hydrogen peroxide in concentrations greater than 3% is considered a hazardous material, and requires proper disposal.

      http://www.orcbs.msu.edu/newsletters/April2000/h az matreport.htm

      --
      https://www.accountkiller.com/removal-requested
    3. Re:CA environmental stuff is wayyyy over the top by WolfWithoutAClause · · Score: 2, Informative
      Yes, but those regulations are really written for 35-70% peroxide which although rather more stable than HTP, is still very dangerous as it is capable of forming with several common hydrocarbons peroxides which turn out to be sensitive contact explosives. Also, below about 70% the water content absorbs much of the heat and stops it boiling away, and it is much more difficult to catalyse; and the 70% grade is typically packed with chemicals that poison catalysts.

      The 85% HTP is a completely different animal, provided you keep it cool (below about 70C) and free from catalytic contaminants it's very stable. But it doesn't take much encouragement at all to turn into steam so you'd just catalyticaly decompose it on site to safely dispose of it.

      --

      -WolfWithoutAClause

      "Gravity is only a theory, not a fact!"
    4. Re:CA environmental stuff is wayyyy over the top by rsclient · · Score: 1

      And good for the inspector. The right answer was (as the story said) "it goes "pssshhh" and we get water and steam" -- but I'm pleased when people who deal with chemicals actually know how they intend to clean them up.

      A wrong answer, OTOH, would be "I dunno -- never checked to see what this stuff does when it spills".

      --
      Want a sig like mine? Join ACM's SigSig today!
  130. Re:The funny thing is, DHMO isn't even the right n by SpooterMM · · Score: 1
    I think Dihydrogen Monoxide is correct, as water is combined with covalent bonds.

    The way the naming works with covalently bonded molecules is that you put di/tri/tetra/penta/etc. in front of the first element if there is more than one. Then you put mono/di/tri/etc. on the second element. (e.g. carbon dioxide)

    Hydrogen Hydroxide would imply an ionic bond. The way naming works with ionic bonds is that you put the name of the first element and then the second element as an -ide. (e.g. sodium chloride)

    The difference between covalent and ionic bonds is that in a covalent bond, the two atoms are kept together because they are sharing electrons, while in an ionic bond the two atoms are kept together because of the opposite charges they gained when they exchanged electrons.

  131. Nah, they tried to ban water, not cups! by purduephotog · · Score: 1

    at least on some of the other articles had additional quotes that showed the officials were quite scared of water... not foam...

  132. I figured it out!! Mystery SOLVED! by rambot · · Score: 0

    If you follow the link on the ad banner on the http://www.dhmo.org/ website, it takes you to http://www.kleinbottle.com/ These people have all been smoking crack from giant pipes made by klienbottle!! Check out that doper holding the huge pipe.

  133. MOD ABUSE - NOT OFFTOPIC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is referring to water (yes, thats Dihydrogen Monoxide). Not offtopic.

  134. Re:Urban legend? by ChuyMatt · · Score: 1

    Conway, eh? 2 questions: WHO ARE YOU, MAN? and do i know you? currently attending UCA

  135. From the DHMO FAQ... by MyHair · · Score: 1
    From the FAQ page, associated dangers section:
    • DHMO is a major component of acid rain.
    • Gaseous DHMO can cause severe burns.
    • Contributes to soil erosion.
    • Leads to corrosion and oxidation of many metals.
    • Contamination of electrical systems often causes short-circuits.
    • Exposure decreases effectiveness of automobile brakes.

    And be sure to check out the Material Safety Data Sheet.

    More seriously, from the article I get the idea that the city wants to ban styrofoam cups anyway and had a paralegal investigating "dirt" on styrofoam. This probably won't help their cause :-).
  136. Our education is responsible for this, not designs by Chemisor · · Score: 3, Interesting

    > I think our approach to designing products aimed at the lowest common denominator

    This is a consequence, not the cause. The problem is our education system and the way it encourages stupidity. Read about that and the solution to it in th
    Montessori Method. It's old and, sadly, is the sort of stuff nobody teaches children any more.

  137. Re:The funny thing is, DHMO isn't even the right n by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, you have it ALMOST right, but its the other hydrogen first, so it should be...

    hydrogen Hydroxide, not
    Hydrogen hydroxide.

    lighten up people!

  138. Re:HAHAHHAHAHA! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Score:2, Funny .. Wow, it sure doesn't take much to be funny around here these days :->

  139. Our education system is to blame, not the designs. by Chemisor · · Score: 1

    > I think our approach to designing products aimed at the lowest common denominator
    > might actually be responsible for all of this

    This is a consequence, not the cause. The problem is our education system and the way it encourages stupidity. Read about that and the solution to it in the Montessori Method. It's old and, sadly, is the sort of stuff nobody teaches children any more.

  140. Yawn...How the hell did this end up on /.? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The moderators are asleep. Quick, post something that is older that most people on the forum...wait, here's an article on DHMO...

  141. Nicely Done Site by Nom+du+Keyboard · · Score: 1
    That's a nicely done site.

    The humor operates on more than one level -- or in the case of the Klein Bottle, more than one surface.

    --
    "It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
  142. tree huggin' by Mr.+Underbridge · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Those old styrofoam containers were also much easier to recycle than the corrogated paper that they use now. A good example of the destructive power of clueless tree huggers and the PR obsessed corps that listen to them.

    I don't mean to be pedantic, but your point does expose a rift between different sorts of environmentalists. A true "tree hugger" would far prefer the use of styrofoam to that of paper which comes from - dare I say - trees!

    Another great battle is over wind power. You'd think all the environmentalists would be on top of that one. Not so - it disrupts migratory patterns and splatters a lot of birds, so many conservationists are against it. Same with things like tidal power (similar effect on fish).

    Again, pedanticism aside, the environmental "faction" is far more fractured than you might think. Frequently the anti-global-warming, conservation, and wilderness camps take diametrically opposing views.

    1. Re:tree huggin' by Dorsai42 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So, if I read you right, the only sure way to preserve the environment is to eliminate Humans from the planet (including environmentalists).

      --
      If you forget about the future, the future will forget about you.
    2. Re:tree huggin' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wind power is subject to a lot of NIMBY FUD. Here in the midwest (US), there are a lot of open areas that are great potential sites for wind power generation. Everyone yells Yea! Save the Environment! until they find out that it's planned for their county. Then the FUD starts.

      I don't recall when the studies were originally done, but were republished locally in the last few months, birds while often deserving the epithet of 'bird brain' are smarter than to fly into windmills or wind turbines. Check an existing wind site, there are not the massive bird kills that the NIMBY crowd is screaming about.

      The only valid issue is the visual aesthetic, (members of my family put one up in the mid-eighties). If you maintain them correctly (i.e. for maximum power production efficiency) they are pretty quiet, just damn big things to have on your horizon. The family members that put up the turbine were located in the back of beyond, with the nearest neighbor over 5 miles away so NIMBY really did not affect them. A friend of theirs was tied up in court for a number of years due to city emigrees 'concerned for the birds'; they also had an issue with his cattle (pastured, not feedlot) when the wind shifted directions and blew from the pasture behind their house, (the 'view' that caused them to buy in the first place); thank God they eventually returned to where they belonged, some folks just don't have the different 'stuff' it takes to live in a real rural setting.

    3. Re:tree huggin' by ces · · Score: 1

      Another great battle is over wind power. You'd think all the environmentalists would be on top of that one. Not so - it disrupts migratory patterns and splatters a lot of birds, so many conservationists are against it. Same with things like tidal power (similar effect on fish).

      Again, pedanticism aside, the environmental "faction" is far more fractured than you might think. Frequently the anti-global-warming, conservation, and wilderness camps take diametrically opposing views.


      A good example of this is nuclear power. Personally I think nuclear power is probably the best near term solution to global warming, the global oil and natural gas peak, and the problems created by coal fired powerplants. However because nuclear == bad is so ingrained in the minds of most people you probably won't find many, especially environmentalists, who would agree with me.

      Another example that provides much personal amusement is the NIMBY types who are fighting the two mass transit systems in the process of being built locally. Many of the arguments they are using could be considered "environmental" such as noise and asthetics (in other words elevated tracks are ugly and block views). Not to mention the complaints about the disruptions caused by construction or demolition of buildings to make room for the right of way and stations. Of course highways are so much quieter, more pleasing to look at, are less disruptive to construct, and require fewer demolitions for their right of way. Actually I'm sure that the same people making such a stink over mass transit would likely be even more upset if there was a new highway being built instead.

      --
      Happy Fun Ball is for external use only.
  143. We're only march 16th by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dear Aliso Viejo City Officials,

    Today is only march, 16th, you're almost two weeks too early for an april's a fool joke.
    I think you are wasting some good material for april 1st.
    Don't be too impatient, the day will come

    Regards,
    --AC

  144. Technical versus social skills by Frans+Faase · · Score: 2, Interesting

    We live in a society where the lack of social skills has a much greater impact than the lack of technical skills. When we all were still farmers we had to plan, count, learn how to do things in order to survive. But now it are the managers, the advisors, the marketeers and the sales people who earn more than people with technical skills. Furthermore, we live in a highly individualized society where an individual without the proper social skills is easily going to lose from those that do have these.

    1. Re:Technical versus social skills by denominateur · · Score: 1

      So the fact that the airplane that ensures that your "social" butt arrives at your "social" job does not crash is not important?

  145. Nice to see the tax cuts working in CA by FerretFrottage · · Score: 1

    ...granted the people associated with this were already mental giants, but just think of what we'll be reading on /. 10-15 years down the line when the education by-products are current money starved education systems (not just CA) are released into the general public.

    No child left behind --> No child gets ahead

    --
    "Look Lois, the two symbols of the Republican Party: an elephant, and a fat white guy who is threatened by change."
  146. You have you facts confused by Hungus · · Score: 4, Insightful
    However the name hydrogen hydroxide is incorrect since that would indicate that the OH part of HOH (H2O ) is an ion and that the extra hydrogen is ionically bonded to it. This is not the case, in H2O both hydrogens are covalently bonded to the central oxygen atom.
    Actually the OH- pair is considered to be ionicly bonded to the H+ ion (or really to an H3O+). Where do yo think we get pH from? pH is defined as the inverse exponent of H3O+ concentration. example: Pure water has a concentration of 1x10(-7) (sorry cant do superscripts) and thus has a pH of 7, NaOH 4% has a concentration of 1x10(-13) and so a pH of 13 and HCl 4% aqueus a concentration of 1x10(-0) thus a pH of 0.
    You really should check your electronegativies before saying bonds are covalent. This is pretty basic chemistry and explains amongst other things why water is liquid at livable temperatures for we humans and many other phenomenon.
    You can find more about naming of chemical structures via IUPAC the International Union of Pure and Applied Chemists
    --
    Bad Panda! No Bamboo for you! In matters of importance ACs will not be responded to. Want to say something critical,OK
    1. Re:You have you facts confused by Graff · · Score: 3, Informative
      Actually the OH- pair is considered to be ionicly bonded to the H+ ion (or really to an H3O+).

      Just because a molecule can dissociate that does not mean that it is bonded ionically. Each hydrogen in H2O is bonded equally to the oxygen atom in what is called a sp^3 hybrid orbital, where the 2s orbital of the oxygen atom combines with the three 2p orbitals of the same atom in order to form four sp^3 hybrid orbitals. Two of those orbitals are taken up with unbonded electron pairs and each of the other two orbitals are covalently bonded to a hydrogen atom. You can see more about this on this web site.

      Electronegativity really does not enter the picture here. Yes, oxygen is highly electronegative and it will tend to "pull" the electrons toward itself but that only means that the water molecule will be highly polar (and only because the charge separation is not symmetrical about all of the axis of the molecule). It is true that more highly electronegative atoms tend to form more ionic compounds than less highly electronegative atoms, but there are other factors at work here. For example, if you look at this web page you will see that the difference between the Pauling elecronegativities of hydrogen and oxygen is 3.5 - 2.1 = 1.4. By most definitions an ionic compound should have a difference in elecronegativity of at least 2.0. So water is a covalent molecule even by that definition.

      By the way, IAAC (I Am A Chemist) ;-)
    2. Re:You have you facts confused by Hungus · · Score: 0, Flamebait
      Mayhaps but not a very good one it would seem from your non-conversivness of the subject.

      Technically O is 1s(2) 2S(2) 2P(4)

      H is 1S(1)

      Gven that the exact location of an electron cannot be determined with out affectsing it (heisenburg) we define teh electron orbitial probability paths based on the quantum energy states they respersent and refer to them as shells

      Attractve force between and two objects is inversly proportional as to the square of the seperating distance

      The actual electronegativity delta between O and H disregarding all other factors is 1.34 not 1.4

      The hydrogen bond is caused by the differental displacement of the Oxigen's P shell and its affinity for the Hydrogren's single 1S electron.

      Without the aformentioned polar covalency ( see your post) which is just a fancy term for a covalent bond with SIGNIFIGANT ionic properties ( for those of you who do not know only 2 atoms of the exacy same electronegativities will ever share a truly covalent bond ever other bond exhibits some level of ionic interaction. Conversly the archtypical ionic bond NaCl shows some signigigant covalent properties also) the increase in potential energy from the removal of an S1 electron would be a much higher value, however due to the ionic nature of the polar covalent bond the said delta increase is offset by the Hydrogen ion (just a proton in the vast majority of cases else we are deling with isotopes) forming a bond with another H2O molecule forming the H3O+ ion.

      Finally I will note again that the presence of signifigant numbers of these ion (HO- and H3O+) in pure water is why i stated

      Actually the OH- pair is considered to be ionicly bonded to the H+ ion (or really to an H3O+)
      please note the phrasing rather deliberately used ... CONSIDERED ... not is.


      with me so far Mr Chemist?
      Now are you a chemist or a student who will be when he grows up one day? Not to be terribly harsh but when you put a smiley after you IAAC and use wiki for citations on scientific matters I start to have my doubts. Am I a chemist? Hardly but I certainly did take grad classes in both Chem and Materials sciences. I deal with and build laser systems (so I know a little something practically about atomic valances and their quantium states) as part of my part time job as a security consultant and the rest of my time I spend in seminary or writing medical database applications.
      --
      Bad Panda! No Bamboo for you! In matters of importance ACs will not be responded to. Want to say something critical,OK
    3. Re:You have you facts confused by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      well, let's see.

      spelling errors.
      restating of obvious information.
      minor "corrections" to facts.

      So where are your citations? I think a wiki is better than no proof at all. (And if wikis are useless, what's the whole point of Wikipedia?)

      All I get from this post is a bunch of random, somewhat irrelevant information and a vindictive attitude, hardly what I'd expect from someone in seminary.

    4. Re:You have you facts confused by Graff · · Score: 1
      Technically O is 1s(2) 2S(2) 2P(4)
      H is 1S(1)

      Right, so when they bond you end up with the oxygen's valence orbital looking like this:
      2s: /\ \/
      3p: /\ \/ /\ \/ /\ \/
      (those should be up arrows and down arrows, representing the electron spin pairs.

      Each hydrogen atom's valence orbital will look like this:
      1s: /\ \/
      (again this is an up arrow and down arrow, representing the spin-paired electrons)

      Because these orbitals are hybridized they end up as sp3 (sp superscript 3) hybrid orbitals, with oxygen as the central atom. Here is a non-wikki website illustrating just how this works out.

      The actual electronegativity delta between O and H disregarding all other factors is 1.34 not 1.4...
      Without the aformentioned polar covalency ( see your post) which is just a fancy term for a covalent bond with SIGNIFIGANT ionic properties


      Using the most accurate values I can find without digging out a CRC Handbook (I'm not near one right now) oxygen has Pauling electronegativity of 3.44, hydrogen has a Pauling electronegativity of 2.20. This means that the difference between the two is actually 1.24. So we are both off a bit but nonetheless we are far below where a molecule is considered to be ionic in quality. That happens at a difference of around 2.0. Despite what you think there is NO WAY a chemist is going to consider this bond to even remotely be ionic. Even at a difference of 2.0 the ionic character is considered to be just slightly better than 50%.

      Now are you a chemist or a student who will be when he grows up one day? Not to be terribly harsh but when you put a smiley after you IAAC and use wiki for citations on scientific matters I start to have my doubts.

      I am an analytical chemist who has worked in industry for over 10 years. I have a BS in Chemistry, working on an MS in Chemistry with a concentration in Analytical Chemistry. I put the smiley after the IAAC to indicate that I wasn't trying to beat people over the head with my credentials and the wikki reference was used simply because it was a fairly decent explanation of the subject without getting too deep into the science to be over the heads of the layman.

      I deal with and build laser systems (so I know a little something practically about atomic valances and their quantium states) as part of my part time job as a security consultant and the rest of my time I spend in seminary or writing medical database applications.

      I'm glad that you have small knowledge of chemistry and physics. However, this does not make you an expert in chemistry. While my explanations here have sided with keeping things simple for the layman rest assured that I have worked with this sort of material for the better part of 20 years, counting undergraduate work, graduate work, and real-world work in research laboratories. I would no more pretend to completely understand the ins and outs of security consulting (though I do program extensively and dabble in IS myself) than you should pretend to be an expert in chemistry.
    5. Re:You have you facts confused by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Always nice to See ACs trolling

    6. Re:You have you facts confused by Hungus · · Score: 1

      1) Sorry, I certainly neither type nor spell very well, I guess that comes from spending more time in the sciences and less time in grammar and typing classes.
      2)They are appearently not that obvious if they were missed initially.
      3)Corrections? I am sorry I am unsure of what yu are implying
      4)My citations were made in my original post all data may be obtained from the IUPAC site.
      5)Well then dont read my posts. If you think my attitude is vindictive, well I am sorry you read it that was but you are most certainly entitled you your opinion

      Of course when I critisize a post or issue I do so on teh record rather than as an anonymous coward (slashdot's term not mine)

      --
      Bad Panda! No Bamboo for you! In matters of importance ACs will not be responded to. Want to say something critical,OK
    7. Re:You have you facts confused by Overzeetop · · Score: 1

      God, I love slashdot!

      --
      Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
    8. Re:You have you facts confused by Graff · · Score: 1
      Right, so when they bond you end up with the oxygen's valence orbital looking like this:
      2s: /\ \/
      3p: /\ \/ /\ \/ /\ \/
      (those should be up arrows and down arrows, representing the electron spin pairs.

      No one commented on this but of course that should really be:
      Right, so when they bond you end up with the oxygen's valence shell looking like this:
      2 p: /\ \/ /\ \/ /\ \/

      I just thought I'd correct my typing error before someone used this to claim that I wasn't really a chemist or something...
  147. Hey! West Coast != California. by Chemisor · · Score: 2, Funny

    > Live on the West Coast for a while, but be
    > prepared to leave, because for every year you live
    > out there, you lose an IQ point.

    Just because California is a communist state that lowers your IQ, doesn't mean it takes up the entire West Coast. There are perfectly fine places to live in Washington state and Canada.

    1. Re:Hey! West Coast != California. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      As a former resident of Oregon, I'd like to reinforce it's exclusion from the list of fine places to live. They make CA look downright sane at times.

    2. Re:Hey! West Coast != California. by DunbarTheInept · · Score: 1

      Same is true over on the east coast. People say "east cost" when they really mean "New York".
      Get south of Washington and that cynicism goes away.

      --

      Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.

    3. Re:Hey! West Coast != California. by hambonewilkins · · Score: 1
      As a former resident of Oregon, I'd like to say the state kicks ass. Even CA's ass.

      There may be nuts but the natural beauty makes you forget all about them.

      --

      God Bless America. Why? Did it sneeze?
    4. Re:Hey! West Coast != California. by miu · · Score: 1
      I went back to visit Oregon a couple years ago and I wish I hadn't. The natural beauty is in the process of being sold off. The Santiam river system is filled with shore houses preventing access and the Bend area is filled with private resorts. Everywhere I went private estates, gated communities, resorts...

      Oregon may still be green, but it has lost it's soul.

      --

      [Set Cain on fire and steal his lute.]
    5. Re:Hey! West Coast != California. by hambonewilkins · · Score: 1

      I agree it's being heavily built-up but it certainly hasn't lost its soul. After living in both the midwest and the east, I can say Oregon still has a soul beating fairly strong. Once we kick out the &%^&*^*^*!@ developers, Oregon will be fully alive once more.

      --

      God Bless America. Why? Did it sneeze?
    6. Re:Hey! West Coast != California. by miu · · Score: 1

      I hope you are right, but I just can't help but think that what happened to Oregon is a forerunner of globalism - its relatively undeveloped state meant that it was cheap to buy and destroy. The developers won't leave until they have wrung out all the money they can and swarmed to their next victim.

      --

      [Set Cain on fire and steal his lute.]
  148. Re:The funny thing is, DHMO isn't even the right n by yo303 · · Score: 1
    I prefer the name hydranol. All alcohols have an OH- radical which gives them their properties. So hydranol would be an alcohol that has a single hydrogen atom instead of the usual carbon.

    How about dihydryl ether? An ether is an oxygen with (usually!) a carbon chain on both sides. Dihydryl ether would then be the simplest of ethers.

    The dihydryl ether name is really pushing it, but I would say that calling water hydranol is a little less incorrect than calling it dihydrogen monoxide. Water behaves more like a simple alcohol than an oxide salt.

    Here's two more names: "Look out for that dangerous hydroxic acid!" (OH- acid = OH- + H+)

    "Don't worry, I'll neutralize it with this hydronium base." (H3O+ with OH-, actually makes 2H2O)

    In reality, water behaves a little like each of these chemical groups. It really is an alcohol, an acid, a base, and even ionic (when dissociated). This is what makes water have so many useful properties.

    Interestingly, it turns out that water molecules bond with eachother somewhat covalently, not just with hydrogen bonds as previously thought.

    yo.

  149. AMEN! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    She was the posterchild of the UK anti-ecstacy lobby for over a year, *ECSTACY KILLED LEAH BETTS"*, no actually, government propaganda about dehydration killed Leah Betts...

    Not that dehydration isn't a risk for ecstacy users, but it's not the massive risk it's made out to be.

  150. Scientific Illiteracy is tragic by aqui · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is simply an indication that 95% of the population is scientifically illiterate.

    Unfortunately science education is not mandatory like english and basic math are. Nor is it taught in a manner that supports curiousity and interest.

    Given that we live in an increasingly technical dependent society it's scary to find pseudoscience and scientific ignorance so rapidly on the rise. For those struggling to separate science and pseudoscience, a good book putting science's role into a clearer perspective is Carl Sagan's book: "The Demon Haunted World, Science as a Candle in the Dark." I have a few copies and lend it to people when they need it. (Note: there are other good books too this is just one that comes to mind).

    The underlying skills of critical thought and a healthy dose of skepticism are the basis of good science. Even basic concepts like Occam's razor are not widely understood or accepted. People need to be made to understand that science is not just ugly formulas in physics class, but that it forms the basis for all things that define our modern high standard of living.

    If less than 1% of congress men ever elected have any scientific background how do you expect them to put forth a meaningful policy on scientific education or even understand basic issues.

    Rather than sitting here in self congratulatory bliss about other people ignorance, we should take our responsibility as the scientifically literate (to some degree anyway) seriously and do what we can to educate people around us. Take an active role in science outreach programs, or at the very least lobby your elected representatives.

    Yes, it is a slow difficult up hill battle, but 300 years ago 95% of the population was illiterate, today most can read and write. This is mostly due to a number of dedicated individuals that convinced their government of the need for literacy.

    Ignorance is bliss... Unfortunately for me its to late...

    --
    ----- "Profanity is the one language that all programmers understand."
    1. Re:Scientific Illiteracy is tragic by dedalus2000 · · Score: 1
      If I hadn't already commented in this thread I would be moding your post up. You make a very cogent argument, However I wouldn't characterize most of the posts I've read as "self congratulatory" disgusted and dealing with it through humor is more accurate.

      --
      My keyboads not woking popely.
    2. Re:Scientific Illiteracy is tragic by jdaily · · Score: 1
      Ignorance is bliss... Unfortunately for me its to late...

      Clearly, it's never too late.

    3. Re:Scientific Illiteracy is tragic by terevos · · Score: 1
      Where are the grammar nazis?
      He said,
      "This is simply an indication that 95% of the population is scientifically illiterate."
      instead of 'are'!

      I figured someone would've caught him on that, seeing as he is posting about English and education.
    4. Re:Scientific Illiteracy is tragic by aqui · · Score: 1

      I think... but correct me if I'm wrong... Actually the subject "population" is singular, hence the verb "is" is singular as well not plural ("are").

      I'm not looking to start a flame war here. I'm sure there are other grammatical errors in my post somewhere... :)

      Just trying to do my part to ensure (or is it insure?!? ;) ), errors are discussed if not corrected.

      Thanks for the feedback.

      --
      ----- "Profanity is the one language that all programmers understand."
    5. Re:Scientific Illiteracy is tragic by suzerain · · Score: 1

      ... 95% of the population is scientifically illiterate...Unfortunately science education is not mandatory like english and basic math are.

      I think you're making statements about things you haven't studied. Science was certainly required at my high school (and junior high school). And they were both public. And you got that statistic from where, exactly? Your ass?

      I thought part of the scientific method was actually doing research before you make ridiculous claims? But hey, that's just my understanding. I could be wrong.

      --
      gameDB
    6. Re:Scientific Illiteracy is tragic by hippycow · · Score: 0
      This is simply an indication that 95% of the population is scientifically illiterate.

      Unfortunately science education is not mandatory like english and basic math are...

      Hmm. Perhaps your mathematical education was somewhat lacking: 1/50 is 98%.

    7. Re:Scientific Illiteracy is tragic by aqui · · Score: 1

      I appreciate your skepticism and critique... bravo. :)

      Unfortunately not everything can be supported in a 5 minute post... :)

      As for the statistics you're right they can be missused and quite often are, although I haven't found any in my "ass" yet ;). I apologize for not giving references, I took the number from Carl Sagan's book, after a rough back of the envelope calculation based on how many people go university for science and engineering came out to a much lower number than 5% of the population.

      As for science not being mandatory... I guess it depends on what you define as science... When I went to school you could drop science after grade 10, after a brief introductory course in grade 9, and grade 10 biology. Chemistry wasn't taught until grade 11, and physics until grade 12...
      I went to what was considered a "good public school" (yes I know this is subjective ...)

      As far as I'm concerned if you haven't seen Newton's laws or basic chemistry you haven't learned enough science. English and math were mandatory until graduation (grade 13).

      Yes, we are making progress... obviously you received a reasonable scientific education. ;)
      Again thanks for the comments.

      --
      ----- "Profanity is the one language that all programmers understand."
    8. Re:Scientific Illiteracy is tragic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you think a lack of interest in science could have anything to do with arrogant fucks who pull numbers out of their ass?

  151. I *LOVE* this kid! by Asprin · · Score: 1


    We should give him some kind of medal - no web site out there does a better job of exposing poor critical thinking than his. [Email forwards are, however, another story! :( ]

    --
    "Lawyers are for sucks."
    - Doug McKenzie
  152. Only overclockers by FerretFrottage · · Score: 1

    They are the only ones that would are do such a thing

    --
    "Look Lois, the two symbols of the Republican Party: an elephant, and a fat white guy who is threatened by change."
    1. Re:Only overclockers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and ravers

  153. Orange County: Home of Morons, Fox News Fools by SimHacker · · Score: 1, Flamebait
    Remember, this is Orange County, where most of the people are right wing idiots who get their news from Fox News.

    -Don

    --
    Take a look and feel free: http://www.PieMenu.com
    1. Re:Orange County: Home of Morons, Fox News Fools by SpaceCadetTrav · · Score: 1

      For being "idiots", they certainly are successful. Orange County is one of the richest counties in the nation.

    2. Re:Orange County: Home of Morons, Fox News Fools by nberardi · · Score: 1

      You know this is really funny. What CA considers "right wing idiots", the rest of the US, just considers consertative democrats.

    3. Re:Orange County: Home of Morons, Fox News Fools by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Successful at parasitically exploiting other people.

  154. Re:The funny thing is, DHMO isn't even the right n by nallen · · Score: 3, Informative

    Actually Chemistry nomenclature is a fun game, as a number of different systems are valid. The catch all rule with things like water is it goes by a "common" name, like ammonia or methane or salt.
    For your amusement some other ways of naming water:
    Hydrogen oxide (the isotope of hydrogen, duetrium has duetrium oxide)

    dihydrogen monoxide (it is valid by one sytem which is used to name binary compounds of nonmetals. ex:
    N2O5 = dinitrogen pentoxide)

    Hydrohydroxic acid (in the acid system, like HCl)

    hydrogen hydroxide (base nomenclature, like Sodium hydroxide)

    hydroxic acid (like H2S is hydrosulfuric acid)

    Hydronium hydroxide (like ammonium hydroxide)

    anyhows, I think you get the point. From a practical stand point this exact problem makes it a pain to order chemicals from a catalog often times!

  155. Re:Our education is responsible for this, not desi by TheLink · · Score: 0, Troll

    Well if you guys were smart Diebold won't be allowed to make voting machines for your elections, Bush would have had a lot more difficulty "linking" Saddam to the Al Qaeda, lying the US into war etc etc.

    Smart people can be rather inconvenient to the powers that be. The Chinese Gov has imprisoned and executed many a smart scholar.

    In the USA they seem to have found alternatives...

    Maybe they put something in your water... :).

    --
  156. How about "dioxide"? by Chemisor · · Score: 1

    Did you know that Osama Bin Laden is releasing a substance called "carbon dioxide" in the atmosphere every day? Did you know that only a liter of this substance can be used to suffocate the entire New York city (if you recycle it, of course)? It is also thought to be responsible for global warming and the eventual destruction of coastal cities.

  157. Smoking Sections by whiskeypete · · Score: 1

    Having a non-smoking section in an encosed restaurant is a lot like having a no-peeing section in the swimming pool.

    1. Re:Smoking Sections by terrymr · · Score: 1

      The difference is in a properly chlorinated swimming pool the pee is broken down in to harmless salts very rapidly. Can't say the same about smoke in a restaurant.

  158. I give it to kids to get them to go to sleep! by rjune · · Score: 1

    I didn't realize what I was doing! My wife and I have given this to our children at night to get them to go to sleep.

  159. Why is this so surprising? by DankNinja · · Score: 0

    California is the model "bleeding heart" liberal state. They are the same as the far right in that they break out the Thought Police at every opportunity.

  160. Anyone notice the dislaimer...? by Godai · · Score: 1
    I notice there's a line in italics at the bottom in the copyright notice (bold mine):

    URL: http://www.dhmo.org/
    Last Updated: March 16, 2004
    Note: content veracity not implied
    Copyright (C) by Tom Way

    *L* I guess they missed that...

    --
    Wood Shavings!
    - Godai
  161. Penn and Teller by patrick.whitlock · · Score: 2, Informative

    had this same kind of thing on thier show, bullshit. they went to a pro earth rally with a petition to ban the use of DiHydrogen Monoxide. every person they asked to sign it did so happily.....even the event coordinator. god bless america..... i think we need it

  162. legislate! legislate! legislate! by six11 · · Score: 1

    So there's the aphorism about the guy with the hammer that only sees nails. Really, this translates very nicely into the world of lawmaking--if your job is to come up with rules and regulations, the first thing you're going to think of when coming across something like this is to draft legislation.

    It stopped surprising me a long time ago, but it still bothers me. People's first reaction to something that they fear is to legislate it out of existence. Ask any random person on the street what they think about some high-profile issue (gay marriage, abortion, gun control, "taxes cuts for the rich" as the saying goes) and they're likely to tell you how the government ought to fix the problem.

    These city council guys didn't make any new laws in this case because the media helped them see their error. But how many other times do they actually PASS silly legislation based on whim? My I-can't-even-find-an-envelope calculation works out to 98% of all laws are passed because the people doing the lawmaking have nothing else to do, and they see lots of nails.

    Tune in next time...

  163. Anyone else... by FroMan · · Score: 1

    Anyone else find this humorous while thinking that California is also one of the most liberal states in the US?

    --
    Norris/Palin 2012
    Fact: We deserve leaders who can kick your ass and field dress your carcass.
    1. Re:Anyone else... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I find it a hilarious confirmation that most liberal thinkers don't bother to use their brains.

  164. Re:The funny thing is, DHMO isn't even the right n by SmackCrackandPot · · Score: 1

    My guess was that it Oxygen Dihydride. Either way, it's darn tricky to remove once your clothes have been contaminated by the stuff.

  165. You should have read the toxicity statement by Peter+Simpson · · Score: 1

    I kid you not...on a tank of 95% 02/5% CO2, the following statement:

    Antidote:
    "In case of inhalation, remove to well ventilated area and administer oxygen."

    1. Re:You should have read the toxicity statement by MikeHunt69 · · Score: 1

      That was probably required by law because of the CO2 content. CO2 buildup can be a problem (but probably not at 5%).

  166. Other Items To Ban!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ban linux! it's like communism, and hippies.
    Ban P2P! it's been known to be used by athiests and homosexual priests.
    Ban Currency! It's used for bribery 'and' election campaigns.

    vettemph

  167. My favorite part by KrackHouse · · Score: 1

    "DHMO is a major component of acid rain."

    --
    What if Digg added local news and a Slashdot inspired comment karma system? ---
    http://houndwire.com
  168. Hairsplitting by hummassa · · Score: 1

    he said hairsplitting, not hairpainting or haircoloring or hairbleaching.

    --
    It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
    1. Re:Hairsplitting by DrSkwid · · Score: 2, Funny


      repeated use of hydrogen peroxide causes the hair to disintegrate, i.e. split

      --
      There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
  169. So is Oxygen by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 1

    Everyone who has ever died has been a chronic oxygen user.

    --
    It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
  170. Niacin considered harmful! by mc6809e · · Score: 1

    I actually had a 6th grade class where the students were asked to bring in ingredients labels from various food products.

    The teacher ranted aboout how all those evil corporations were putting mysterious chemicals in our food, like niacin, riboflavin, and citric acid! Oh no!

    1. Re:Niacin considered harmful! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Niacin actually is toxic in ... gaahrg. Don't remember the dosage, but it's not *that* many times the US RDA. It's not the first thing that kills you if you take too many vitamin pills (iron does that), but it's not the last, either.

  171. Flamebait? Are you insane? by paiute · · Score: 1

    Who's to flame here? Chemists? What are you, some ACS undercover shill?

    --
    If Slashdot were chemistry it would look like this:Cadaverine
  172. Or the zeroth alkanol? by pjt33 · · Score: 1

    Since the alkanols are C_n H_2n+1 OH, H2O is the 0th alkanol. How would one extend the sequence meth-, eth-, prop-, but-, pent- back one? Is "nonanol" a suitable name?

    1. Re:Or the zeroth alkanol? by Noren · · Score: 1

      nonanol is a fine chemical name, the only problem is that it's taken.
      The chemical meaning of the "Non" prefix is nine, not none.

    2. Re:Or the zeroth alkanol? by localhost00 · · Score: 1
      Since the alkanols are C_n H_2n+1 OH, H2O is the 0th alkanol. How would one extend the sequence meth-, eth-, prop-, but-, pent- back one? Is "nonanol" a suitable name?

      No. Such chemicals require the existence of a Carbon atom.

      --

      Calling atheism and agnosticism a religion is like calling bald a hair color.

  173. Old Joke by ek_adam · · Score: 2, Informative

    The Coalition to Ban Dihydrogen Monoxide has been around a long time. There's even a song about it to the tune of Battle Hymn of the Republic (aka John Brown's Body).

    The DHMO song can also be found at the author's page here, but Google is probably more resistant to the Slashdot effect.

  174. Another example of a successful troll by Tired_Blood · · Score: 1

    By your own admission, this was a smart individual pulling the prank.

    All people make mistakes, especially if mislead. The proper approach would be to revisit the surprising information at a later date and check a source you trust.
    It's easy to be taken off guard, you just have to sleep on it sometimes.

    A 14-year old troll is now reveling in a lot of attention.

    --
    This is not my sig.
  175. Re:Depends on what you consider "professional" by pjt33 · · Score: 1

    Please tell me that the menu isn't bang in the centre when viewed under IE. It can't be intentional, can it?

  176. Next up by dwaggie · · Score: 1

    A story was leaked off a satire website indicated a city in CA that never did its own research. This was to test the gullibility of Internet news hounds, who believe anything written is canon, and that there isn't so much bureaucracy in a given city's government that someone wouldn't've have had a chemist look at some stuff involving environmental concerns, or that local businesses wouldn't've laughingly called to report the reports as false.

    -=-
    Double contractions rock.

  177. If we assume the acheivement is tied to IQ.. by TheScienceKid · · Score: 1

    ... then it would be fair to say that the test scores are normally distributed, assuming your average class is a random sample of the population (as opposed to a high or low ability grouping due to school assessments), therefore 68% will be within one standard deviation, and, more importantly, the normal curve is symmetrical about the mean, and therefore there are exactly HALF above and HALF below the mean.

    QED

    1. Re:If we assume the acheivement is tied to IQ.. by ezzzD55J · · Score: 1

      All you have to say for median to be the same as average, is that the distribution is symmetrical around the median..

    2. Re:If we assume the acheivement is tied to IQ.. by dmd · · Score: 1

      Right. Clearly you've never graded papers... I've never, in years of grading, found anything like a normal distribution.

    3. Re:If we assume the acheivement is tied to IQ.. by chgros · · Score: 1

      Right. Clearly you've never graded papers... I've never, in years of grading, found anything like a normal distribution.
      Yes, but have you ever graded 100000 tests at a time?

  178. Oxygen is not flammable. by hummassa · · Score: 1

    What will happen is that the *match* will burn faster and mabye hotter (careful with your fingers), nothing else.

    --
    It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
  179. No DHMO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  180. Future Government Consultant by failedlogic · · Score: 1

    This nerd is going places, esp if he pursues a career as a consultant or to get an IPO:

    1) He knows how to get free media exposure
    2) He's drawn the attention - and scared - the government and public into panic. Perfect for introducing over-budget solutions.

  181. Hard drive furror by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    From the state who wants to ban the use of "Master" and "Slave" in hard drive designations

    heh
    I sent 'em an e-mail saying that this discriminated against those of us in S&M relationships.
    Haven't had a reply yet :-)

  182. Slashdotted! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But our webserver was cooled with Dihydrogen Monoxide! Looks like the combination of H2O and Styrofoam made our server into a huge bomb calorimeter.

  183. Mod Parent Up by pokeyburro · · Score: 1

    I'd like to know how they finally noticed what was going on, too. None of the articles I could find mentioned this.

    --
    Lately democracy seems to be based on the skybox, the Happy Meal box, the X-box, and the idiot box.
    1. Re:Mod Parent Up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He was there, but I don't think he graduated from Tech. Did he?

  184. Even for non-runners by The+Tyro · · Score: 4, Informative

    Hyponatremia can be a problem, though rarely in a normal person (IIAD, BTW).

    The most common scenario where I've seen symptomatic hyponatremia in a non-athlete is in a syndrome called SIADH (AKA: Syndrome of Inappropriate Anti-Diuretic Hormone). I've rarely seen it in psychiatric patients who compulsively drink massive quantities of fluids as part of their psychosis... Believe it or not, it's actually possible to drink enough water that you dilute out your electrolytes.

    Anti-Diuretic Hormone is what determines the final concentration of your urine (ie. how much free water your kidneys scavenge from the filtrate in your kidneys)... it works in the kidney's distal tubules. Interestingly, ADH is inhibited by ethanol. Ever wonder how beer seems to go through you so quickly? Well, the answer is that it really doesn't... part of that massive urination is from the alcohol inhibiting ADH secretion, your kidneys start dumping free water, and you start peeing like a racehorse. The result? You get dehydrated; one of the major contributors to the discomfort of hangovers. Heh... a bag or two of IV fluids does wonders for a hangover.

    Dilutional Hyponatremia is relatively easy to fix (obviously depending on severity)... just restrict fluid intake. In the case of SIADH, you also have to hunt for the cause... some lung cancers are notorious for secreting excess Anti-Diuretic Hormone.

    Note that severe hyponatremia is life-threatening... you can have refractory seizures, coma, and profound mental status changes. Fixing it too quickly is also dangerous, and can cause a nasty (and permanent) condition called Central Pontine Myelinolysis... definitely not on the top-ten-diseases-to-have list.

    --
    Even if a man chops off your hand with a sword, you still have two nice, sharp bones to stick in his eyes.
    1. Re:Even for non-runners by nakaduct · · Score: 1

      a bag or two of IV fluids does wonders for a hangover.

      Sounds like a party at your place would be quite a gas.

      "Hi, thanks for coming, could I see your arm for a sec? (*ow*) There we go. Just pull this thing around behind you, no questions, you'll thank me later! Have fun! And watch out for stairs!"

    2. Re:Even for non-runners by ginbot462 · · Score: 1

      >> definitely not on the top-ten-diseases-to-have list

      I guess one of those would be magnimus- obliviophallocytis.

      http://www.uprightcitizens.org/03/

      --
      Atlas Shrugged : Thematic Story :: Battlefield Earth : Organized Religion
    3. Re:Even for non-runners by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Back in 1997 during Army Basic Training we had a group of eskimo kids (I say kids, they were 18 i was 22 at the time) from Alaska in our company. One of them had not been eating his meals and was sick. Drill Sergeants told him to drink water which he did of course. One day out on an M-16 range he collapsed.

      Unfortunately, the de facto solution to someone collapsing from a supposed heat induced injury is to stick them with an IV bag. He died shortly after.

      The week after this happened we all started getting a couple canteen cups of gatorade a day.

    4. Re:Even for non-runners by Mawbid · · Score: 1

      Alright, I'll ask. What is on the top-ten-diseases-to-have list?

      --
      Fuck the system? Nah, you might catch something.
    5. Re:Even for non-runners by jafuser · · Score: 1

      Heh do you have a link that's in English? =)

      Now I know how non-geeks feel when I try to explain something about their computer. =P

      --
      Please consider making an automatic monthly recurring donation to the EFF
    6. Re:Even for non-runners by ShooterNeo · · Score: 1

      Do you live in Houston? (I noticed you gave a link to the Houston Chronicle).

      While wars in Iraq and missions to mars may be helpful to a small extent, as well as increasing senior citizen entitlements, shouldn't the funds be better spent investing in the country? I mean, with the half trillion or so the Iraqi war may end up costing, or the next half trillion the mission to mars may cost, or the who knows how much giving ALL senior citizens drug benefits, an awful lot of improvement could be made. I mean, there are reforms and changes that more money could bring in virtually every sector of American society, from transportation to energy production to criminal justice to education, and so forth.

      Instead, the money is being burned up. The simple fact that it would take an awful lot of suicide attacks to do 500 billion in damage to the country, or cost as many lives as the war in Iraq may come out to. (not just deaths, just how many American maimings have we had so far in Iraq?) This isn't cost effective. Giving the sector of the economy that isn't producing anything even more money isn't effective, either, especially with the current scheme that gives all senior citizens benefits rather than the poor, sick ones who cannot afford EFFECTIVE medication. And going to mars? Please. Sure, a miniscule amount of R&D will be needed...the vast majority of the money would be spent on hideously expensive rocket launches using the same old tech, and NASA bureacracy and quintuple checking every last hair that would go on the mars craft.

      I'm trying not to be biased here...but ignoring simple politics (I acknowledge that all the candidates on the field would basically leave things like this), I just can't see why these decisions make any practical sense.

  185. He "wrote" it? by whitroth · · Score: 1

    Um, sorry, maybe he did the Website, but somewhere around here I've got a flyer I picked up (at a Real SF con) from maybe 20 years ago about the dangers of dihydrogen monoxide.

    mark "jeez, inhale enough and it'll kill you!"

  186. More technically... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Its known as "Massa and slave"

  187. Its been done by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well
    Nearly

  188. The technical term for these sites by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    There is a legal term, and most people aren't aware of it, but the phrase is an old norse one:

    urakompletfawkinidjut

    It kind of sums it up and really addresses the concerns you have about these kinds of sites. I personally think the norse phrase says it all, don't you?

  189. Politicians Not As Smart As 6th Graders by thelizman · · Score: 0, Redundant

    In a survey of 50 6th grade students, one rightly recognized that DHMO is water. Of hundreds of city officials, how many had to be told this fact?

    Yes. Trust government, indeed.

  190. What a Gulla-bull. by doppleganger871 · · Score: 1

    (That was a quote from Bugs Bunny.)

    Anyhoo, I bet the same can be applied to many of the left wing enviro-militants. Who knows, "Global Warming" may really mean "Natural Earth Cycle".

    Heh, ya know?

    1. Re:What a Gulla-bull. by mwood · · Score: 1

      Well, just because it's natural doesn't mean it isn't bad for you. Just look at forest fires, floods, earthquakes, hurricanes, etc.

      I think the problem that some people have with warming being natural is that then we can't punish any technocrats for causing it.

  191. Elvis Shot JFK: We Have Proof! Joke or Real? by jokewallpaper · · Score: 1
    I created my parody "Elvis Shot JFK: We Have Proof!" Web site back in 1998. Despite the fact that the URL:

    http://www.jokewallpaper.com/elvisshotjfk

    Has the word "joke" in it...I still get an e-mail about once a month from people who think it's real. People are gullible even when you tell them it's a joke.

  192. Re:Our education system is to blame, not the desig by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 1

    I recently discovered, much to my delight, that the Montessori school in my district is taxpayer supported - I can send my kids there for no additional cost. I know where they're going next year...

    --
    Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
  193. Mod Parent Up by Valdrax · · Score: 4, Informative

    Most people are wholly unaware of the fact that Jimmy Carter went to Georgia Tech and became a nuclear engineer for the Navy. Sam Nunn also started out as an industrial engineer at Georgia Tech before heading off to Emory & Emory Law to eventually graduate with a law degree.

    Besides, the grandparent poster short-changes those of us who do have science/math backgrounds, who are passionate about politics, and who have considered getting more involved.

    --
    If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
  194. No, the correct name should be: by Nopal · · Score: 1

    Mision Vieja (Mision Vieja if you use the proper punctuation). I guess that the extra 's' made it there when the name got bastardized into English. It also should be 'Montevideo', not 'Montividieo'. Montevide is the capital of Argentina.

    1. Re:No, the correct name should be: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Montevideo is the capital of Uruguay, not Argentina. Argentina's capital is a little town called Buenos Aires. Try to be correct when you are correcting other prople.

  195. Styrofoam by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 1

    They should make Dunkin Doughnuts pay for the cost of picking up styrofoam cup litter. 9 times out of 10 any cup lying on the ground will say Dunkin Doughnuts on it. My other favorite is discarded lottery tickets but that is another article.

    --
    It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
  196. not to be pedantic, but... by Marvin_OScribbley · · Score: 1

    If I remember right from my chemistry class many moon ago...

    The H+ ion is Hydronium,
    while OH- is hydroxide

    Therefore it could just as well be called Hydronium Hydroxide.

    My favorite though is still "Aqua Hydra" ;-)

    --
    I'm not a journalist, but I play one on slashdot
    1. Re:not to be pedantic, but... by BillyBlaze · · Score: 1

      Not really. H+ would just be called the hydrogen ion, but it mixes with water to form hydronium, H3O+.

  197. Efficiency! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I see the Techdirt -> Slashdot posting gateway is up and functioning properly again! Kudos to all the hard working programmers out there making sure that Slashdot doesn't need to generate stories, or even headlines, by itself anymore!

    Automation is the future!

  198. Another one... by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 1

    "The Man Show" (yes, not exactly "Frontline") set up a stand somewhere and asked woman to sign a petition to end "Woman's Sufferage". Most of them gladly signed and some even made comments in disgust about the evils of it.

    --
    It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
  199. Indiana bill sets the value of pi to 3 by joel_archer · · Score: 2, Funny

    In the sweepstakes for legislative stupidity, I always like to play this card. The bill House Bill No. 246, Indiana State Legislature, 1897, reportedly set the value of pi to an incorrect rational approximation (ie. "3").

    The "creator" of this new value of pi listed as it advantages that it was much easier for school children to use. He even went so far as to offer the new value of pi at no charge to Indiana for use in their school books, however all others would be charged a royality!

    Here is a link, but a better link is here,

  200. caveat emptor^^^^^^recyclor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    However, even if consumers recycle, theres no guarantee the truck that picks it up takes it to a recycling center. In my parent's town the recycle truck and the trash truck dump their loads in the same landfill.

    My mom doesn't bother sorting her aluminum cans and plastic anymore.

  201. Wait a minute by The+Tyro · · Score: 4, Informative

    Don't pitch Ecstasy like it's a harmless medication... it is not. (Disclaimer: I'm an ER physician, and I've treated ecstasy users)

    Ecstasy (MDMA) is chemically related to the amphetamine family, and has many of the same effects. One of the side-effects of Ecstasy is hyperthermia... an elevation of body temperature that can lead to rhabdomyolysis (mass breakdown of muscle tissue, often leading to kidney failure), brain damage, and death.

    Ecstasy acts primarily on the serotonergic and dopaminergic neurons in the CNS, and appears to irreversably harm the former (documented pathologically in animal studies, and observationally in humans). Interestingly, Prozac and some of the SSRI drugs seem to partially antagonize the effects of Ecstasy (but if you're planning on stopping your anti-depressant so you can get a better buzz on the weekend, you need serious help).

    There's another problem: you never know what you're getting when you buy street drugs. Unless you have a degree in organic chemistry and are making your own (which can be done), it pays to be cautious.

    Maybe you've taken ecstasy hundreds of times and had no problem... good for you. But ecstasy is not harmless... I've seen it go wrong, and it's not pretty.

    --
    Even if a man chops off your hand with a sword, you still have two nice, sharp bones to stick in his eyes.
    1. Re:Wait a minute by Abcd1234 · · Score: 1

      Hmm, well, just to be Devil's Advocate (I've never taken ecstacy, nor do I ever plan to... mj is my only vice):

      --

      Alcohol has been linked to numerous problems. Abuse can cause damage to the liver, the heart, and worst of all, the brain (in particular, the cerebellum). Similar to many other types of drugs, alcohol also acts on the dopamine system in the brain. As a result, it's physically addictive, and excessive users develop tolerance over time. Moreover, some recent studies have shown that alcohol and similar compounds that act on the reward system in the brain can cause permanent changes which result in long-term physical dependence.

      As for interactions, alcohol is just as bad as any other, and interacts with many drugs. For example, combined with aspirine, side effects can include liver damage, among other things.

      Of course, unlike street drugs, the government sets standards for alcohol quality, in order to ensure public safety. This wasn't always the case, though, as during prohibition, the rate of alcohol poisoning increased dramatically, as people acquired illegal "street" alcohol. Of course, if you knew what you were doing, you could produce your own alcohol relatively safely.

      So, sure, maybe you've consumed alcohol hundreds of times and had no problem. Good for you. But alcohol is not harmless... I've seen it go wrong and it's not pretty.

      --

      Of course, I would never personally use ecstacy, but that's my choice. However, if it were legal, it might be possible to properly *educate* people about it. After all, it's a little tough to teach your child about the dangers of ecstacy use if it's illegal:

      "You really should be careful if you ever take ecstacy. Not that you should, because it's illegal! You see, it can cause hyperthermia, or overheating, so you should trying to keep yourself cool. Not that you should have to worry about this, because it's illegal! And if you have a friend who's consumed ecstacy, you should try to keep an eye out on them, to ensure that they don't overheat. Of course, they'd never be on ecstacy, because it's illegal! So, be careful with that stuff, as it's not harmless. And it's illegal!"

    2. Re:Wait a minute by bbc22405 · · Score: 1

      Eh, it's probably on par with tobacco and alcohol.

    3. Re:Wait a minute by djw · · Score: 1
      There's another problem: you never know what you're getting when you buy street drugs. Unless you have a degree in organic chemistry and are making your own (which can be done), it pays to be cautious.
      That's actually the same problem your parent post was complaining of, not a different one. Do you know what you're getting when you buy Prozac, or aspirin, or a bottle of scotch? Yes, because they're LEGAL, and can therefore be regulated.
    4. Re:Wait a minute by carn1fex · · Score: 1
      First of all the study from Johns Hopkins which concluded the following:

      "Ecstasy acts primarily on the serotonergic and dopaminergic neurons in the CNS, and appears to irreversably harm the former (documented pathologically in animal studies, and observationally in humans). "

      was found to be total bullshit as the researchers accidentally used methanphetamine instead of MDMA in the study. They themselves have issued a statement debunking their paper.

      As a heads up, Prozac use often tags people with seratonin imbalances. Seratonin is in the MDMA equation and intensifies positive and negative effects of the drug on these people

      Lastly, ecstacy tablets bought on the street are almost never ever pure and are often cut with speed,cocaine,heroin,DXM (this causes major overheating),drano or other nasties which are responsible for ER visits, imho.

      --

      ---------

      No matter how thin you slice it, its still baloney.

    5. Re:Wait a minute by TGK · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Perhaps a portion of your argument that was left out would go as follows.

      Alcohol and many other legalized drugs have been around not just for decades but for centuries. We have a solid and firm knowledge of the health risks these drugs present and how to manage those health risks.

      MDMA [Ecstasy] has been in common usage for only the past few decades at the outside. There have not yet been adequate tests preformed to gauge the effect MDMA will have on users over a long period of time, particularly recreational users as opposed to prescription users.

      One strong argument against many kinds of drug legalization is that it is well and truly possible to kill yourself with an overdose without trying very hard. The only legal RECREATIONAL drug this is possible with at the moment is alcohol, which requires a fair bit of effort to actually induce alcohol poisoning.

      Note -- I am aware that impaired judgment can kill and that Alcohol may cause judgment to be impaired. Of course, getting a blowjob can also cause judgment to be impaired. Neither is really safe while driving. Care should be exercised when under the influence of any mind altering susbstance (booze, pot, sorority chicks, Bawls, etc)

      --
      Killfile(TGK)
      No trees were killed in the creation of this post. However, many electrons were inconvenienced.
    6. Re:Wait a minute by PsibrII · · Score: 1

      Life is a crapshoot. If you want little Billy with ADD to be able to concentrate and get his MBA in the future giving him dexadrine might help. However if little Billy has a weak or quirked nervous system in his heart (latent WPW, etc.) he probably won't make it past Jr. High, if he has a latent psychosis or schizophrenia, the parents probably won't make it past jr high.

      If little Billy is left to his own devices he may end up as a drywall contractor with his own business, and have a big enough business that he hires a dozen MBAs. Who can say ?

      For someone who is feeling really crappy, and thinking of going on an asskicking mission next day at work, XTC is probably not that big of a risk overall. Worst case you have to go to the ER and then have a legitimate to get out of work for the next week.

      Luckily in this society of neurotic mommies we have a number of legal and excessively dangerous substances that we can always point to and say those are 3 orders of magnitude more dangerous.

      Why else would so called medical professionals risk the life and health of some nutcase by shooting them full of thorazine or some other anti-psychotic likely to turn them into a physical and mental cripple. In that case the human critter is more dangerous overall than just about anything. Even a monkey with a nailgun.

      Having read through a bunch of the Phikal lab notes I was amazed that the whole class of drugs XTC was part of were personally used by their inventor and a bunch of his friends. That's 170+ variations on mescalin, mutltiple isomers and salts of each. And yet the guy was actually alive at the end of it all, and still with enough of a brain to write a more or less coherant book about it(considering that he was of russian stock, a shrink, and a biochemist the fact that the book isn't 600 pages+ is amazing alone by itself)

      The studies on MDMA most often cited were bogus. The idiots couldn't even tell they were using methamphetamine rather than MDMA. After they find out they blew the entire thing they still try to cover their ass and say it's still legit. In a perfect world these researchers would be force fed random doses of 250 mg MDMA or 250mg of Meth 3 times a day until they could tell the difference. If they died, too bad, can use their brains for studies of after effects.

    7. Re:Wait a minute by SubtleNuance · · Score: 1

      We know that MDMA has some side effects.

      Can you please tell us what the side-effects of Gastric Bypass procedure are? What about Breast Augmentation? Also, please, what are the extra effects of synthetic opiates as opposed to natural ones?

      The point is simply that there are uninteded effects of all manner of arguably unnecessary substances/acts. MDMA ingestion is the right of any person in a culture that values independant freedom. The Medical Profession is not given sole right to decide what-is and is-not an acceptable array of consequences to an act... its an individuals' right to decide.

      Driving a car puts pollutants in the air that agravate my asthma. It also leads to plenty of avoidable deaths each year, why dont you try and stop ICE-Care drivers? Oh, because it dosnt fit with the puritan status-quo crusade of the Pro-Prohibition Fascist Right... it is far to easy to jump on their unreasoned bandwagon than to take stock of the whole situation and make BETTER suggestions (with regard to cost, consequence and benefit of public welfare and safety)

    8. Re:Wait a minute by Ibanez · · Score: 1

      Actually, SSRI's help prolong the high, since it keeps the serotonin from being reabsorbed by the neurons. It also helps prevent the reuptake of another serotonin like substance, forgot what it is called (starts with an m, maybe?) which is what harms the neurons. And there is NO substantial proof the harm to the neurons is permanent.

      Blake

    9. Re:Wait a minute by WhiteWolf666 · · Score: 1

      IMHO, many of the dangers associated with Ecstasy could be mitigated by FDA regulation.
      Sure,
      Ecstasy acts primarily on the serotonergic and dopaminergic neurons in the CNS, and appears to irreversably harm the former (documented pathologically in animal studies, and observationally in humans).
      But from what I've ready, that is both:
      A) A matter for debate (the animal studies I've read about have had some serious methodolgical problems), and
      B) Not terribly more scary than some of the statements I could be making about alcohol.

      Ecstasy is a pretty scary thing. Especially street ecstasy.

      However, a decision to take MDMA (if you know that's all your getting (and you can't know that if you bought it on the street)) is not particularly more risky than a decision to take alcohol.

      Occassionally, people have adverse reactions to both. In excess, both will kill you. Both have long term side effects, and both alter your brain chemistry.

      Ecstasy isn't pretty? Neither is alcohol abuse.

      I understand you are a physican, and I understand that you have seen some scary things.

      And while I wouldn't say that you are spreading FUD, I think that it is necessary to put comments like your own into perspective.

      Life is risk. Unbridled exageration of risk (not what you are doing), or not having a *context* in which to evalute risk often leads to misguiding abominations like the drug war.

      Regulate it, tax it, fund anti-drug programs.

      Push it underground? Cause people to create 'street' black-market varients?

      Create profit margins which are absolutely OBSCENE and spawn organized crime?

      I'm not interested in drug use. I don't want to screw up my brain.
      At the same time, drug 'scare' tactics are a rhetorical/political weapon which must be tightly controlled.

      --
      WhiteWolf666 an exBush supporter. All you new-school,compassionate,save the children Republicans can rot in hell
    10. Re:Wait a minute by The+Tyro · · Score: 1

      Drugs are not my thing, but I know of people who have been using recreationally their entire lives with few effects. I don't necessarily have a problem with people using recreational substances... but the ones who are smart and discrete about it are not the ones I see.

      There are a couple of problems with people roasting their brains and killing themselves in search of a better buzz. One, it's a complete waste. Two, it's an ugly way to die. Three, it leaves behind a trail of sadness and tragedy. Four, I'm the one who has to break the bad news to their mother/father/children.

      I find it interesting that people in this thread have replied as if I'm some kind of Office-of-Drug-Control-Policy magpie, when I'm simply offering a valuable bit of clinical correlation about the downside of ecstasy use. Part of informed consent is "informed," and you can't make rational, adult decisions without all the facts. Ecstasy isn't all sweetness and light; there are real, legitimate concerns about its immediate and long-term effects.

      I don't necessarily have an anti-drug agenda (I do have an anti-stupid-drug-use bias). I just want people to understand the risks and benefits... that's the legal and ethical standard in my practice.

      FYI, the origin of the title "Doctor" is the Latin "Docer" meaning "teacher;" I simply consider that part-and-parcel of what I do.

      --
      Even if a man chops off your hand with a sword, you still have two nice, sharp bones to stick in his eyes.
    11. Re:Wait a minute by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ah same crap different doctor. oh no something done wrong/too much of/too little of/ is dangerous! run away! you are there to fix us when things go wrong, and if we are willing to listen to you the doctor individually, help us minimize risks we take to our bodies. it's not your job to automatically declare what is an acceptable risk to ourselves. this goes for all the anti-smoking, anti-playground, anti-sports injury, anti anything doctors out there.

      sorry for the off topic nature

      Chris

    12. Re:Wait a minute by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      YHBT. YHL.

    13. Re:Wait a minute by packeteer · · Score: 1

      Although Ecstasy (MDMA) is chemically similar to amphetamines it is weaker than methamphetamine which is what it is compared to sometimes. Per milligram MDMA is weaker than methamphetamine and methamphetamine users often do much more in a day. A standard dose of MDMA is 80-100mg at once and the average regular user uses Ecstasy less than once every two weeks. Methamphetamine users often snort, smoke, or inject several time that amount every couple of hours for days at a time.

      Also about street Ecstasy being dangerous that is partially true. Pure Ecstasy is cut with sometimes dangerous drugs directly as a result of MDMA prohibition. If Ecstasy was legal people would get their pills from trusted govt. inspected labs which would be much safer. Also the media has made a big deal out of pills containing dangerous chemicals such as PMA which has killed people without anything else but most of the time street ecstasy is cut with caffiene or ephedrine or DXM which is in over the counter cold medication.

      --
      unzip; strip; touch; finger; mount; fsck; more; yes; unmount; sleep
    14. Re:Wait a minute by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      The massive crime caused by prohibition is worse than the drug problem would be without prohibition.

      Asking a paramedic or ER employee about drugs (or car crashes) is going to elicit a grossly biased response. This isn't to say that they would intentionally deceive anyone, but that the sample they see is quite skewed. They only see the results of actions that have gone bad. The millions of people that take MDMA without incident will never pass through (or if they do, they will come through for other reasons).

      Most of the problems with drugs are caused by prohibition. If they were all legal, then they would be regulated. The biggest causes of overdoses are not a regular user chasing a bigger high, as many of the celebrity deaths are passed off, but impure product (inconsistent quality or not what is advertised) and ignorance in new users. If the people using were properly educated in their drugs of choice (as they are with alcohol, caffeine, and nicotine) and the product is what is advertised, as it is with the legal ones, then there would be an incredible drop in overdoses.

      But the people against drugs aren't interested in public safety. They seem to be more interested in forcing others to do what they think is the proper moral decision. Personally, I do not think that enforcing morals was the goal of the country, and the fact that there were no drugs banned in the first 100 years of this country's existance seems to back up my opinion.

  202. Very Comforting by Transcendent · · Score: 1

    Isn't it comforting to finally get a taste of the brain power at work in our government?

    And these are the people who are making the decisions for us...

  203. I don't think by BCoates · · Score: 1

    world.std.com is about to go under from a Slashdotting.

    1. Re:I don't think by nerw · · Score: 1

      No, it does that just fine (and often enough) on its own.

  204. Reminds me of a Simpson's episode. by CompWerks · · Score: 1

    Nelson: Hey Bart! - your epidermis is showing!

    --
    If you can read this sig - the bitch fell off.
  205. Discredit Tactic -- Is /. a CoIntelPro Agent now? by SubtleNuance · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This is crap. Absolute Crap. The fact that some mis-informed or ignorant people support Environmentalism, Conservation or Sustainability DOES NOT MEAN that the people trying to form policy suggestions are all wrong.

    this is h20 BS is dragged out so that Environmental-Deniers can snicker at Environmentalists *AND* so that status-quo will be maintained. "See, they're all nuts! Wackos! Look at this! hahahahah".

    Absolute 100% propaganda. While true, repeating it serves a very nafarious and specific purpose... Why does Slashdot propagate this meme?

    Here is another one: Capitalists are all Fascists? Nazis were 100% anti-socialist, and very good friends of the IBM, Siemens and Ford's of the world. These Capitalists enabled Nazi Fasism from the start. They funded and co-operated in putting the Nazi's into power. Therefore, Capitalists are responsible for the WWII.

    Works both ways.

  206. DHMO is Grade School Joke! by sciop101 · · Score: 0

    I heard of DHMO in grade school (4th grade, I think) in the 60s. This displays how bad the education system is going. After living in the UK, Canada, and USA, I have seen how bad all these school systems are. I know a woman in England that thought treacle was mined.

    --
    The only thing new in this world is the history that you don't know.[Harry Truman]
  207. Re:The funny thing is, DHMO isn't even the right n by silicon+not+in+the+v · · Score: 1

    Heh, heh, Incorrect information--Informative! Correct information--Informative! I'd love to cash in on some of that.

    Anyway, for all of you who roll your eyes at the ignorance of many around you who believe this kind of thing, you should prescribe snopes.com to them. It should become a household name for them. Maybe put a Post-it note on their monitor to remind them of it.

    There is something to be aware of about that site, though. If you haven't really searched around there, go to the section called "Lost Legends". There are very interesting items there, such as that Mr. Ed was really played by a zebra, Kentucky Fried Chicken actually changed its name because of legal pressure from the state of Kentucky for using their name, and a few others. Those are fakes, and each of them has a link at the end for "more information about this page". They then let you know that "The Repository of Lost Legends (TROLL)" is their place to blow off a little non-factual steam and illustrate the point of never blindly trusting ANY source to be completely authoritative by itself.

    --
    We may experience some slight turbulence and then...explode. -Capt. Mal Reynolds
  208. Wrong name.... by tiger99 · · Score: 4, Informative

    If I remember my chemistry correctly, dihydrogen monoxide is incorrect because the molecule splits into H+ and OH- ions. It should be hydrogen hydroxide. I made the same mistake in chemistry class in 1964.

    1. Re:Wrong name.... by TheDanish · · Score: 1

      Yes, but hydroxilic acid sounds so much more menacing.

      --
      Danish != nationality
    2. Re:Wrong name.... by tiger99 · · Score: 1

      Indeed it does! I must confess that I did not have time to read the web site in full, and see the various other strange but chemically correct names. Now, the formula for an alcohol is C(n)H(2n+1)OH, where n is 1 for methanol, which is highly toxic, 2 for ethanol etc. There seems to be nothing preventing n being zero, so can we call it aquanol? The site has been slashdotted so I can't get access to it right now to see if he has already thought of that one.

  209. nice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Good pick-up! This was also once claimed to be a Kurt Vonnegut speech.

  210. Gullible people in California??? by kmankmankman2001 · · Score: 1

    I mean, what are the odds?

    --
    "The bigger the lie, the more they believe." - Det. Bunk
  211. California has it all by Gorimek · · Score: 1

    You're not wrong. California has the biggest idiots, the greatest geniuses, the worst criminals and the most visionary entrepeneurs. What they share is a willingness to try new things nobody has done before, and as a result most new trends in the world, good and bad, originate here.

    The earthquakes help a lot. They seem very scary but are really a very small danger. So they keep out the irrationally cautious and cowardy, leaving an unusually bold and daring population.

    Remind me never to live there.

    I don't mean this in a bad way, but it's mutual. Stay away. We don't need your kind, and you wouldn't like it here.

  212. what happened to plain speech movement by peter303 · · Score: 1

    I bet you the average patent claim or property deed would bamboozle many of the smart-asses in this thread. English, the richest language in the world, has a half-dozen ways of saying anything by reverting to a jargon dialect. A college educated person may need to know the multi-syllable French words plus a fair amount of Latin and Greek. An urban hipster may need to know a fair amount of Spanish. They used to say that if you can explain it to your spouse or children in plain English (heavy on the small syllale Germanic words) hen you may not really understand it yourself.

  213. dihydrogen-monoxide vs Creationism by bstadil · · Score: 1
    the ridiculous ignorance of the liberals

    As distinct from the Religious Right, The Christian Fundamentalist and their ilk?

    --
    Help fight continental drift.
    1. Re:dihydrogen-monoxide vs Creationism by jimmy_dean · · Score: 0, Troll

      You sir are a troll. If I had some moderator points right now, I'd mark you as such. But I don't, so all I can do is point you out as one. Get a life.

      --
      -> Sometimes, you just gotta break free from the shackles of proprietary code.
    2. Re:dihydrogen-monoxide vs Creationism by sublimespot · · Score: 1

      You sir, are a republican. Unbothered by anti liberal speak, but upset by anti republican speak. The guy above is not a troll. You get a life and learn that some people have ideals that you may not

    3. Re:dihydrogen-monoxide vs Creationism by bstadil · · Score: 1
      I was not trying to Troll, but I grant you that my comment rightly could be construed as Flamebait.

      It was kind of a knee-jerk reaction to balance out the political aspect.

      There is ignorance and ignorance. Ignorance as in "I do not know" is OK, what galls me is the "I do not want to know" variety.

      Peace!

      --
      Help fight continental drift.
    4. Re:dihydrogen-monoxide vs Creationism by jimmy_dean · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Ok, that's valid. Thanks for letting me know that...I do appreciate that and now I take back my troll comment. :)

      --
      -> Sometimes, you just gotta break free from the shackles of proprietary code.
  214. Re:A song by scharkalvin · · Score: 1

    You put a little water into H2SO4
    Then you hold your ears because it gives a mighty roar.

    You put a little water into H2SO4
    then it blows you out the door...

  215. UMM I hate to point out the obvious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    what kind of idiots work for this city's government everyone knows what Dihydrogen Monoxide is its um water 2HO H2O wow

  216. Re:The funny thing is, DHMO isn't even the right n by Graff · · Score: 1

    All of these names are incorrect by chemical standards.

    Alcohols and ethers are organic molecules by definition. If you take a look at that link you will notice that the formula for an alcohol is generally R-OH and an ether is R-O-R'. The "R" in those formulas stands for at least one carbon atom, and possibly an entire structure of carbon chains and branches. Since HOH doesn't have any carbon atoms it is almost definitely excluded from being called an alcohol or an ether.

    Hydroxic acid is sort of a misnomer. While H2O would be considered an acid according to the Lewis definition and the Bronsted-Lowry definition of an acid, it is not considered an acid by the Arrhenius definition of an acid. So it all depends on how you look at it. One major thing that holds chemists back from calling water an acid is that generally something is considered to be an acid if it is in an aqueous solution. For water that's a bit of a circular definition and so it's not really used.

  217. Re:dws by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    nhtsa's done experiments on the effects of pot on various skills such as passing ability. they got the subjects high & asked them to pass the car in front.

    trouble was, the subs were quite content just to follow the car;-) so driving while stoned might be the solution to aggressive driving;-)

  218. Darwin award or honorable mentioning? by northwind · · Score: 1

    I like when people get caught in starting their mouth before putting the brain into gear.
    This qualifies for a Darwin Award (actually what they call an honorable mentioning)
    For those who [still] don't know what a Darwin Award is: It is an award given to people who have contributed to the human race by removing themselves from the gene-pool.

  219. We did that! by BobPaul · · Score: 1

    Ha! I remember back in 6th grade sending around a petition to ban the same thing... got more than a couple of hundred signatures. That was when I decided most people who sign petitions don't really know what they're signing for.

  220. And redefines value of PI by PGillingwater · · Score: 2, Funny

    And in related news, the city of Aliso Viejo, CA has decided to legislate a simpler value of pi = 3.15, which is much more accurate than the value of 3 preferred by the Alabama legislature. They based this decision on the well-documented scientific research of Dr Richard Kimber.

    --
    Paul Gillingwater
    MBA, CISSP, CISM
  221. There is such a thing by The+Conductor · · Score: 2, Informative

    There actually is such a thing as latex paint thinner. It is a mixture of water & an emulsifier of the same sort used in the latex paint. It looks like milk (which is itself an emulsion). Supposed to work better than plain water.

  222. "Professionally designed website" - yeah, right by Animats · · Score: 1

    What a junky mess.

    1. Re:"Professionally designed website" - yeah, right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "what a junky mess" says the out of work dotcommer. why back in my day...

  223. Stop Women's Suffrage! by dtabraha · · Score: 2

    Gullibility is a national epidemic, not just restricted to politicians or 5th graders.

    When "The Man Show" was first starting out, the guys put up a booth and were trying to get women to sign a petition to help stop women's suffrage.

    They got quite a few naive women of all ages stopping by and even telling them how great it was that they were doing such a wonderful thing.

    Chances are our gullibility epidemic has something to do with the fact that teachers are paid like indentured servants in this country.

  224. Symptoms by phorm · · Score: 3, Funny

    After long sessions of dealing with infected MS machines, I can tell you truthfully that they do cause extreme illness with symptoms including:

    a) Increased heartrate, anger
    b) Sweaty palms
    c) Migraines
    d) Vision impairment

    Of course, other OS's aren't so great either... I've noticed a trend of body odour and poor social tendancies that seem to afflict Linux users, and the Mac users generally seem to suffer from some form of uncomfortable constipation issue.

    1. Re:Symptoms by 10101001+10101001 · · Score: 1

      You're confusing the stick up their ass with an inability to push stuff out of said ass.

      --
      Eurohacker European paranoia, gun rights, and h
  225. fifty ninth graders? by bob_jenkins · · Score: 2, Funny

    Whoa, what school goes up to fiftyninth grade? High school lasts long enough already !!!

    Oh wait, nevermind.

    1. Re:fifty ninth graders? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Reminds me of a (phoentic) joke,

      "Q. What does michael jackson like about twenty three year olds?"

      "A. That there are twenty of them."

  226. Hoax by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative
  227. ah yes by The+Tyro · · Score: 0

    Were you making a legalization argument there?

    Alcohol in moderation seems to cause no ill effects, and can even have some benefits... the same cannot be said for MDMA and the other scheduled amphetamine

    I think if you want to smoke, drink to excess, shoot-up, whatever... you are pretty much free to do so... all the above are widely available (some with legal penalties, some not). What I also believe, however, is that in making that conscious, informed, adult decision to indulge in such behavior, you should then absorb the costs for your habit, including purchase, medical costs, or even eventual detox.

    It's fine with me if you want to shoot up... you're only hurting yourself... but I think it is morally wrong to attempt to force an uninvolved party to pay the price for another's stupidity.

    --
    Even if a man chops off your hand with a sword, you still have two nice, sharp bones to stick in his eyes.
    1. Re:ah yes by Abcd1234 · · Score: 1

      Were you making a legalization argument there?

      To some degree, yes. While I do favour legalization over prohibition in general (just look at what alcohol prohibition achieved... organized crime flourished, alcohol poisoning skyrocketted, etc), I was also trying to illustrate the double standards exercised by the government when deciding what substances are legal and which aren't.

      Alcohol in moderation seems to cause no ill effects

      Actually, for some, as the grandparent poster alluded, the same *can* be said for MDMA. The same applies to many other types of illegal drugs (mj, 'shrooms, etc). Of course, abuse is always a bad idea, no matter the substance... and it's impossible to make black-and-white statements about drug safety (eg, some people are allergic to alcohol).

      but I think it is morally wrong to attempt to force an uninvolved party to pay the price for another's stupidity.

      Interesting line to draw... 'course, in the US, with it's privatized healthcare system, this is easier to achieve. In my country, Canada, it's a tricky question... after all, obscenely obese people put a load on the healthcare system. However, we don't penalize them for their overuse of food...

    2. Re:ah yes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      MDMA has the unarguable benefit of giving you some of the best, most beautiful times of your life.
      Basically its the happiest that you have ever felt, cares and worries disappear, strangers become friends, you dance your ass off under the stars and its all non-sexual and non-competitive.
      Pretty much the opposite to normal life for most people.
      To miss out on paradise in a pill is just pharmaceutical ludditism.

  228. Portland banned foam cups years ago by DavidInPortlandOrego · · Score: 1

    Portland (Oregon) banned foam cups, and any foam takeout containers, years ago. Not sure if it was on the advice of a 14 year old though.

  229. Re: msnbc blank page in mozilla by airdrummer · · Score: 0

    the ms in msnbc stands for MicroSoft, so this is not at all surprising:-P

  230. Re:The funny thing is, DHMO isn't even the right n by localhost00 · · Score: 1
    Di-Hydrogen Monoxide isn't the proper name for water. That would imply a H2 ion bonded to a O ion. IIRC, this is not correcct. It's been ten years since I took chemistry, but shouldn't it really be Hydrogen Hydroxide? (H bonded to OH)

    Actually, no. This is a naming convention used for molecular compounds. That is, the adding of the prefixes to convey atom count. Water is not an ionic compound. "Dihygrogen" does not imply that the two hydrogen atoms are connected, just like Carbon Dioxide, where the two oxygen atoms are not connected.

    Also ionic compounds do not use such prefixes.

    --

    Calling atheism and agnosticism a religion is like calling bald a hair color.

  231. Re:Our education is responsible for this, not desi by radish · · Score: 1

    I went to a Montessori school (in the UK) from age 3 to 7. Looking back I certainly credit it with a lot of my academic & professional success since then. When I have kids they will certainly get the same advantages.

    --

    ---- Den ene knappen er powerknapp, den andre er Bender voice knapp "Bite My Shiny Metal Ass"

  232. ROTFLMAO... come on people, mod up funny! by pr0ntab · · Score: 1

    I think a few people misunderstood the joke.

    Here's a hint, try a Google Search.

    Get it now?

    --
    Fuck Beta. Fuck Dice
  233. PJ is gonna be pissed when she hears about this. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    She's done so much to raise respect for paralegals. Damn.

  234. Obligatory Rebuttal by localhost00 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Perhaps you've heard of it: a colorless, odorless liquid; a powerful coolant and solvent; an easily- synthesized compound which is used by industry, the military, commercial operations, and even private individuals.

    Yes, we are talking about hydrogen hydroxide, also known as dihydrogen monoxide, and we are here to tell you that what you've heard about DHMO is probably not the whole truth. There are forces out there, such as the Coalition to Ban Dihydrogen Monoxide, who would seek to legislate its use and availability, placing heavy limitations on it-- and eventually, eradicating it entirely.

    In the interest of fairness, we invite you to see their argument, and then we urge you to return here, to learn the truth. Their subversive agenda must not be allowed to prevail.

    Hydrogen hydroxide is beneficial!

    It has been shown that hydrogen hydroxide enhances the functionality, growth, and health of many forms of life-- including humans!-- and current research suggests that it has become an integral part of our planet's ecological balance. Hydrogen hydroxide is environmentally safe! Opponents of dihydrogen monoxide would have you believe that it is some kind of uber-toxin, that it wreaks caustic terror on anything it touches. This couldn't be farther from the truth; when handled properly, it enhances nature rather than destroys it, and even a worst-case scenario DHMO accident would be a trifle for the natural cycles of our world to handle. Hydrogen hydroxide is benign! The Coalition and others have popularized the label "dihydrogen monoxide" over the more chemically-accurate "hydrogen hydroxide" because they know how loaded the former name is. "Monoxide" has become synonymous with pollution, toxic gases, industrial waste-- and while hydrogen hydroxide is sometimes a factor in these problems facing our world today, it is rarely the dangerous element. Hydrogen hydroxide occurs in nature! To hear its naysayers' descriptions, one would think hydrogen hydroxide was solely the product of industrial technology; that it came from years of research in clandestine labs. This is not the case! Hydrogen hydroxide has been a part of nature longer than we have; what gives us the right to eliminate it? We need hydrogen hydroxide! Don't let an uneducated and terror-stricken mob of fanatics railroad you into giving up your right to choose!

    Support the use and distribution of hydrogen hydroxide in your neighborhood, city, state, and country!

    --

    Calling atheism and agnosticism a religion is like calling bald a hair color.

    1. Re:Obligatory Rebuttal by Salvo · · Score: 1

      Don't you mean Hydronium Hydroxide.
      IANAC, but can a single water Molecule exist on it's lonesome and still stay pH Neutral?

      2H?O ? H?O? + OH?
      2 Water = Hydronium? and Hydroxide?

    2. Re:Obligatory Rebuttal by Salvo · · Score: 1

      Damn Slashdot doesn't support Unicode :( 2 H2O H3O+ + OH- 2 Water = Hydronium+ and Hydroxide-

    3. Re:Obligatory Rebuttal by localhost00 · · Score: 1
      Pure water is pH neutral, whether it's one unit or one mole (1 mole approx. equal to 6.02E+23 units). It is a bonded molecule even though it can come from the reaction of ions of Hydronium and Hydroxide.

      BTW, I just copy/pasted that page......

      --

      Calling atheism and agnosticism a religion is like calling bald a hair color.

    4. Re:Obligatory Rebuttal by localhost00 · · Score: 1
      Better yet, think of it in terms of this:

      Hydronium and Hydroxide ions are two completely different entities. When they combine, they chemically react to create two water molecules. So it is incorrect to refer to water as a hydroxide since the hydroxide ion itself is a single entity and the water molecule is a single entity. Ionic compounds like Salt (Sodium Chloride) are composed of a mix of separate entities of Sodium ions and Chloride Ions. There is no such thing as a Sodium Chloride molecule. If you try to put a Sodium ion adjacent to a Chloride ion, nothing chemically happens. They just draw towards each other for the charge. You will not obtain a single entity. It's two separate entities that are attracted to each other.

      --

      Calling atheism and agnosticism a religion is like calling bald a hair color.

  235. Actually, its not a bad ordinance by originalhack · · Score: 2, Informative

    If your read the actual ordinance, it is aimed at keeping the polystyrene out of the landfills and the "chemical" issue is just an add-on to the justification. That is a laudable goal. Too bad they overplayed their hand with the H20 issue.

  236. Maybe i missed something... by The+Tyro · · Score: 1, Informative

    but exactly where did I reference the Hopkins study? That one reportedly dealt with a putative parkinsons/MDMA link. No matter, there's plenty of research for you to peruse on MDMA, much of which deals with the Neuropharmacology of the drug. The Hopkins study is hardly representative of the entire body of literature on the subject.

    As a heads up, Prozac use often tags people with seratonin imbalances. Seratonin is in the MDMA equation and intensifies positive and negative effects of the drug on these people

    Excuse me... what? I'm not even sure what you're trying to say here... In the animal studies currently available, Prozac has not been shown to intensify the effects of MDMA... in fact, the opposite is true. The mechanism has even been elucidated. Prozac can reportedly intensify some neurotransmitter effects of other amphetamines, but I've never seen research to suggest that effect exists with ecstasy.

    Lastly, ecstacy tablets bought on the street are almost never ever pure and are often cut with speed,cocaine,heroin,DXM (this causes major overheating),drano or other nasties which are responsible for ER visits, imho.

    Street drugs are often misrepresented... a point I made in my initial post. Even so, it an incredible stretch to blame the deleterious effects of ecstasy on adulterants. The adulterants you mentioned are harmful, but that hardly evidence that ecstasy is harmless.

    --
    Even if a man chops off your hand with a sword, you still have two nice, sharp bones to stick in his eyes.
  237. I'm Telling you! It is dangerous! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    I was quite alarmed by your trenchant essay regarding the insidious substance: dihydrogen monoxide. I asked my physician to perform testing to determine if I might be showing signs of exposure to this chemical. Indeed, the results indicated high concentrations in nearly every cell of my body! I am attempting to reduce the concentration of this pollutant in my system via vigorous consumption of its natural nemesis, anhydrous ethanol. I fully expect this therapy to alleviate my concerns.

  238. Urban Myth Alert by SubtleNuance · · Score: 2, Informative

    Not so...it..splatters a lot of birds

    VERY VERY few birds run into windmills. no more or less than any other man made object. This is bunk.

    Myth: Wind farms pose a serious threat to birds.

    Fact: Any tall structure presents a risk to birds, but the threat from wind turbines is not only very small, it is also one of the most intensively studied of all risks to birds. To put this risk into perspective, US bird experts Curry and Kerlinger have estimated that 100 million bird deaths a year can be attributed to domestic cats, compared to an estimated 5 to 10 thousand killed by turbines - meaning cats' risk to birds is at least 10,000 times greater than that posed by wind turbines in the US. The Exxon Valdez oil spill alone is estimated to have killed up to 500,000 birds. New research at operational Australian wind farms indicates that risk to birds may be even less than first expected, and well below the predicted levels from models that were run as part of the approvals process. The research found not a single mortality for rare or significant bird species


    From here

    1. Re:Urban Myth Alert by Mr.+Underbridge · · Score: 1
      VERY VERY few birds run into windmills. no more or less than any other man made object. This is bunk.

      I guess I omitted the word "supposedly" unintentionally. ;) But the conservation camp does believe it, and that was, indeed, the point.

    2. Re:Urban Myth Alert by SubtleNuance · · Score: 1

      But the conservation camp does believe it

      Why would you say this? Which "conservation camp" believes this bunk? Reasonably informed people DO NOT BELIEVE this. It is untrue, constantly parroted by Environmental-Deniers in order to discredit Environmentalism.

      Just like this article, it is flately wrong to say that because some ignorant people believe 'it' dosent mean those they would align themselves with also believe 'it'.

      I can see through this convenient "discredit-propaganda", why dont you?

    3. Re:Urban Myth Alert by Mr.+Underbridge · · Score: 1
      Why would you say this? Which "conservation camp" believes this bunk? Reasonably informed people DO NOT BELIEVE this. It is untrue, constantly parroted by Environmental-Deniers in order to discredit Environmentalism.

      The Sierra club. They've since come on board but they had an unfortunate sound bite.Cuisinarts of the Sky

      Also, I'm generally skeptical of anyone who makes up names for groups of people like "Environmental-Deniers." You seem to suffer from delusion.

      I can see through this convenient "discredit-propaganda", why dont you?

      Because 1) many people, well-informed or not, do believe it, even if they're not spokespeople for major organizations. 2) The Sierra club put its foot in its mouth with that "Cuisinart" quote. It was catchy, and it caught on.

    4. Re:Urban Myth Alert by SubtleNuance · · Score: 1

      The Sierra club. They've since come on board but they had an unfortunate sound bite.Cuisinarts of the Sky [wind-works.org]

      Guilt by association.


      Also, I'm generally skeptical of anyone who makes up names for groups of people like "Environmental-Deniers." You seem to suffer from delusion.


      Ad Hominem.



      Because 1) many people, well-informed or not, do believe it, even if they're not spokespeople for major organizations.


      Straw Man.

      2) The Sierra club put its foot in its mouth with that "Cuisinart" quote. It was catchy, and it caught on.

      Begging the Question

  239. Re:The funny thing is, DHMO isn't even the right n by Aerion · · Score: 1

    Hydronium hydroxide (like ammonium hydroxide)

    Ammonium hydroxide is NH4OH.
    It's not so much that "hydronium hydroxide" is "like ammonium hydroxide," as the two don't really have that much in common other than their anion.
    Water does autoionize into the hydronium ion and the hydroxide ion, however, both at a concentration of about 1.0 x 10^-7 M.

  240. Ironic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    that a post about a knee-jerk reaction by someone who hadn't checked the facts is replied to with mostly knee-jerk reactions. A paralegal did some poor research, and what might have been a bad bill got put on the agenda. The bill "would have banned the use of foam containers at city-sponsored events"--it would not have banned water.

  241. Dihydrogen Oxide can be dangerous! by jmansfield · · Score: 2, Informative

    Here is an excerpt from the MSDS (material data safety sheet) for water:

    Primary Route of Exposure
    Eye X Skin X Inhalation X Ingestion

    Effects of Overexposure
    Acute:

    Inhalation: Vapors or mist, in excess of permissible concentrations, or in unusually high concentrations generated from spraying, heating the material or as from exposure in poorly ventilated areas or confined spaces, may cause irritation of the nose and throat, headache, nausea, and drowsiness.

    Skin: May cause irritation with discomfort, and seen as local redness and possible swelling.
    Prolonged contact may cause more severe irritation and discomfort.

    Other than the potential skin irritation effects noted above, acute (short term) adverse effects
    are not expected from brief skin contact; see other effects, below, and Section 11 for

    Eyes: May cause irritation, experienced as discomfort or pain, and seen as excess redness and
    swelling of the eye, and possible injury to the cornea.

    Ingestion: If more than several mouthfuls are swallowed, abdominal discomfort, nausea, and diarrhea may occur. Aspiration may occur during swallowing or vomiting resulting in lung damage.
    May cause irritation with discomfort, and seen as local redness and possible swelling.

    Scary!

    (see http://www.msdsonline.com)

  242. Re:Depends on what you consider "professional" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is.

  243. Re:Discredit Tactic -- Is /. a CoIntelPro Agent no by greening · · Score: 1

    I think your looking way into it. As if your trying to be offended by this article. It's merely stating a simple fact that a Californian city almost banned foam cups from being misinformed. How many times have you heard some one say, "It's a law in that ." But, then you go and look it up and it's completey wrong... It's the same deal here. If you're an environmentalist, then good for you. Your post is attacking non-environmentalists (and big business at that). I could get very offended at your post (claiming such that it's just flamebait crap, but I don't). Just accept that people think different than you.

    Now, I'm all for environmentalism as long as it doesn't interfere with my everyday life in too far an extreme. If there is an environmentalist trying to get something passed to better the environment, then he needs to make sure that he has each and every last detail, down the the dotted 'i's and crossed 't's. Trying to get something like that passed without doing any kind of research of your own is just neglegence at its finest (or poorest?).

    --
    Are you telling me that you don't see the connection between government and laughing at people? - Interviewer
  244. Pride in ignorance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When you are ignorant in humanity subjects, you are at least a dork, but when you are ignorant in science, you are cool. How many times do we see that a kid gets teased for scientifically oriented and gets called names like nerds or geeks (yeah, I know, it is sorta a badge of honor here at /., but at schools, being a social outcast can be painful to some kids)? The funny thing is, without geeks and nerds there won't be any major innovation that raise the standard of living of others. Even the cool things (cell phones, iPods) are the result of geek achievements.

    It is time for societies to acknowledge that science and humanities are two sides of the same coins. Ignorance in both are not cool. Is it any wonder that high tech is catching more rapidly outside the US? In places in Asia, being brainy is prestigious.

  245. Re:You know they forgot one more by Phat_Tony · · Score: 3, Funny

    One more similar hilarious joke site:

    Creationist Science Fair

    --
    Can anyone tell me how to set my sig on Slashdot?
  246. The Air Would Have to Suck by virg_mattes · · Score: 1

    > besides eveyone knowns the air sucks thanks to NY

    ...except people who actually know anything about meteorology. Prevailing winds in the area go from west to east, so the air over NJ would have to suck very, very hard to reverse that. Actually, New Yorkers could complain that NJ is fouling up their air instead.

    No, the air quality in New Jersey sucks entirely due to New Jersey (except the southern part, which gets Philadelphia's grime, but who cares if a bunch of Pineys get soot-blackened anyway? 8)).

    Virg

    1. Re:The Air Would Have to Suck by falcon5768 · · Score: 1

      very true SEPT YOUR A MORON THERE WAS A STUDY ABOUT THIS # YEARS AGO THAT PROVED IT WAS ALL NY..... OFf shore winds push it INTO NJ... you seem to forget the areas that smell are costal cities on the hudson and kill van kull. fucking idiots

      --

      "Slashdot, where telling the truth is overrated but lying is insightful."

  247. we tried this on students at my school by cagle_.25 · · Score: 2, Funny

    Several years back, and just for grins, I got my AP Chemistry class to do some "research" on students by posting signs by the water fountains that said "Danger! These fountains contain dihydrogen monoxide." The signs also outlined some of the dangers of dhmo. Then, we sat back at a distance and recorded reactions by various students.

    The best line: "They can't make me drink this stuff! I'm telling my mom!"

    --
    Human being (n.): A genetically human, genetically distinct, functioning organism.
  248. Toothpicks: by SamSim · · Score: 1

    Toothpicks: Harmless tools useful in maintaining dental hygiene, or HORRIBLE, DEADLY WEAPONS!?

    In the US, toothpicks outnumber people by a factor of more than 20 to 1.
    88% of innocent children in the US have "easy access" to toothpicks.
    Only 2% of these children have been taught how to use a toothpick.
    Toothpicks are a direct blood relative of Sporks. Sporks are the tool of Satan.
    According to the RKMPC, the AVMR of a toothpick is 926.1 -- the exact same AVMR of a canister full of deadly cyanide gas. Coincidence? Some large government agency thinks not!

    No one has ever died because they DIDN'T have a toothpick.

    ~E2

  249. dumblaws.com by tilmanb · · Score: 0

    > With a small amount of research I'm sure you can pull up stupid laws and occurences for just about every state in the union.

    You dont even need to do the research: http://www.dumblaws.com has it all!

    --
    cd pub; more beer
  250. Re:Discredit Tactic -- Is /. a CoIntelPro Agent no by kundor · · Score: 1
    Wow. It's been many years since I've seen godwin's law in action.

    Congratulations.

  251. who the hell is in grade 59? by CdaveC · · Score: 1

    hehe..

  252. Done by virg_mattes · · Score: 1

    ok, lets try this again. you take an oxygen tank, just some goold old 2O2, you open that sumabich up and stike a match, some flint, whatever, you touch a 9volt to some steal wool, you put it close to that escaping gas, the little fire starts. next, you remove this match, spark, or whatever. Does the fire go out? Come on, dont do a 'thought experiment', go try it.

    I've done it. Really, actually done it. Held a match in a set of tongs, opened the tank valve, put the match in. The match popped like a firecracker. Guess what? There was no fire after that. The pure oxygen stream doesn't burn like a gas burner. It doesn't burn at all. Sorry, but you lose. Stuff burns faster in pure oxygen, but if there's nothing to burn, there's no fire in the oxygen flow.

    Maybe you should consider actually doing what you propose that others do, since if you did more than the "thought experiment" yourself you'd have known this.

    To test this yourself, get an oxyacetylene torch. Open the fuel and oxygen valves, and spark it, and you get a flame on the tip. Now, turn off the fuel feed, but not the oxygen. What happens? I did this one in real life, too, and the flame vanished. You could put your hand in the oxygen flow, and it was cool. Again, you lose.

    Bye, now. See you when you get a clue.

    Virg

    1. Re:Done by cavebear42 · · Score: 1

      That's funny because i did it too, and guess what happened, it burned. Very small stream of O2, lit it on fire, it burned. I'm sorry you weren't there to see it but hey, at least you have no personal skills.

  253. figures by neoThoth · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I've been to Aliso Viejo before. It's got the worst cell reception of any place I've ever been in my life. And not just with one carrier, with ALL carriers. Why? Because these same genius' decided that cell phone towers destroy property value so getting one approved requires a congressional oversite commitee.
    Also realize that the "town" just incorporated little less then 2 years ago. So these guys are fairly new at the game.

  254. Molten Ice by Skeezix · · Score: 1

    Personally I think the nastiest of all is molten ice! Don't want to fall into a vat of that stuff...

    1. Re:Molten Ice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I totally agree. That would not be a good thing. Any suggestions for avoiding encounters with molten ice. I can't help but worry about it now that you mention it :)

    2. Re:Molten Ice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What is molten ice anyway? -ab

  255. dihydrogen monoxide by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    God damn H2O,

    I used to pull this stuff on kids when I was in middle school, got them scrared when the chemistry teacher agreed with ervything I said

  256. But then what will keep my computers safe? by theblacksun · · Score: 1
    I work in an IT department, and a few times a year we will unpack and set up a good 20 to 30 machines in the course of a week or two. When you consider that each machine has a seperate box for the monitor and the actual computer its easy to see how when trash time comes the place is ugly: Cardboard, plastic, and styrofoam everywhere. The cardboard and even the plastic wrapping can be recycled. Not the styrofoam. I can think of at least three occasions when we stuffed most of a dumpster full of the stuff.

    The computer industry is just one example of the industrial use of styrofoam. I can assert with confidence that there are many others. So there is an absolute shitload of it. But why use styrofoam when properly made cardboard spacers can do the job? Well obviously the foam is cheaper.

    So if you really dislike styrofoam that much (and I can understand how, the environmential impact of that crap is not pleasant to think about) you best do some lobbying and hope that Bush doesn't get reelected(assuming you live in the U.S.). I can also assert with confidence that if he is, he will do exactly dick with the issue. The precident shows industry (for the most part) will not increase overhead for the sake of the environment without some sort of push, so without legislation you're cause is screwed. Based on Bush's current environmential record, I would be concentrate on his changing of emission standards, gutting the enforcement budget of the EPA, and tendency to help set up strip mining/oil drilling contracts in national parks before I started sweating the foam.

    --
    Ignorance kills, complacency kills, hatred kills, but usually not the ones guilty of them.
  257. Re:Our education is responsible for this, not desi by mandalayx · · Score: 1

    What is the Montessori Method.

    The main premises of Montessori education are:

    * Children are to be respected as different from adults and as individuals who differ from each other.
    * The child possesses an unusual sensitivity and intellectual ability to absorb and learn from his environment that are unlike those of the adult both in quality and capacity.
    * The most important years of a child's growth are the first six years of life when unconscious learning is gradually brought to the conscious level.


    wow, that ridiculous tuition seems reasonable now. because what value you can you put on your conscious intelligence. or alternatively, what amount would you pay to prevent your kid from being stupid?

  258. No by theblacksun · · Score: 1

    Cocaine doesn't block dopamine receptors. It blocks dopamine reuptake, increasing the amount of dopamine in the synapses. And just because the kidneys and livers have no receptors doesn't mean it will damage them. Just because the brain does have receptors doesn't mean it won't damage them.

    --
    Ignorance kills, complacency kills, hatred kills, but usually not the ones guilty of them.
    1. Re:No by AshtangiMan · · Score: 1
      Dopamine system: transmitters which put it in the brain, receptors which absorb it. We agree on that :) It is true that just because the brain has receptors doesn't mean it won't damage them, but you can't just assume that there is damage. The fact that there are receptors suggests that the brain is built to handle it, which means that it is an expected condition. To determine at what point damage is done we would need to do a study, which, at present time, is being proposed. The problem with the study is that NIDA controls the pot which would be used, and it is essentially ditch-weed. There is also a proposal currently to allow a UMass Amhearst based group to grow some high quality strains for a MAPS study.

      So hopefully one day soon (within the next decade) we will know the truth. But in the meantime all we have is some empiracle evidence which shows that there is no chronic effect on the brain, but there is some negative effect on the liver and kidneys from heavy use of pot.

    2. Re:No by theblacksun · · Score: 1
      Ok, just to make sure we're clear about the dopamine thing, if cocaine blocked dopamine receptors it would have the opposite effect. It blocks the reuptake valves, so when dopamine is released into the synapse, it stays there. The more dopamine that is in a synapse, the more likely the next neuron will fire. Incidentially, this is the exact same mechanism that meth works on, except meth last a whole hell of a lot longer than cocaine. I'm too afraid to try either. Addiction is enormously prevelant in my family so I think powdered reward might do me in.

      And now to THC and the human body. You're right about the drug receptors, THC has some in the brain but in what area has slipped my mind. It doesn't mean that it is harmless to the head though. Those receptors are there, but if you fuck with them enough you can't tell me there's no possibility of damage.

      As far as the liver and kidney stuff goes, I must plead ignorance. I don't know about the studies but I wouldn't mind knowing, and a link or two would be appreciated.

      --
      Ignorance kills, complacency kills, hatred kills, but usually not the ones guilty of them.
    3. Re:No by Nalgas+D.+Lemur · · Score: 1

      As someone who hasn't used ecstasy or other drugs but who has done a fair amount of reading (mostly due to general curiosity and far, far too much free time) and who has some familiarity with it through friends, I figured I'd chime in.

      The mention of the interaction between SSRIs and ecstasy reminded me of a node on Everything2 I ran into recently about serotonin syndrome. It seems like a pretty miserable condition to end up in whether you have the more severe symptoms (coma, death) or not.

      I ran into that info while wandering aimlessly though E2 after looking to see what people had to say about different SSRIs my doctor has had me try recently, and as annoying and frustrating as the side effects I've ended up with have been, that would, to put it mildly, just downright suck.

      So, kids, think about that before using MDMA while on something like Prozac or Zoloft or anything similar. The more you know, I guess.

      Also, specifically to The Tyro, it's always nice seeing people taking the time to respond to people's comments about their posts, especially with even more information to support their position and to try to keep people informed about subjects they(you) know about.

    4. Re:No by AshtangiMan · · Score: 1
      Transmitter: pukes out dopamine, Receptor: sucks dopamine in. You speak of receptors and reuptake valves, and state that blocking a receptor would keep dopamine out of the brain . . . er, did you mean transmitter? My understanding is that the dopamine system has these two pieces, and that your word "reuptake valve" is synonomous with my word "receptor". In the cocain case, the blocking of receptors mean that transmitters die out in response to too much dopamine in the synapse. If there is a misunderstanding on my part then perhaps you will enlighten me :)

      I never said that having THC receptors meant that THC might not harm the brain. I merely stated that having them suggests that THC is an expected chemical, for some reason. I also stated that one should not assume that just because it has a mildly intoxicating effect that THC does harm the brain, and that all credible research to date suggests that there is no chronic effect (and by this I mean specifically cognitive) on the brain. There is always the possibility that we will find another neurotransmitter that we produce that looks like THC, and is the reason these canabanoid receptors are there. This would mean that THC is the mimic drug, and would be working similarly to cocain, just on a different neurotransmitter system. Check out the maps site (maps.org i believe, too lazy to dig it up for you cause I have a pilot test in a few minutes) for more information.

  259. Oxygen kills (no really) by nfabl · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Oxygen (generated from simple plants or algae) is responsible for the single greatest extinction event known.

    Apparently 95% of life on earth during the early period of plants was wiped out. They were mostly anerobic bacteria.

    In fact oxygen is pretty nasty in aerobic organisms too, especially in the form of superoxides.

    1. Re:Oxygen kills (no really) by Short+Circuit · · Score: 1

      Never heard of a superoxide. Perhaps you meant "peroxide", which is an O2(-1) ion?

      Granted, H2O2 (hydrogen peroxide) is a carcinogen that until the last twenty years or so was recommended as a valuable disinfectant. Heck, my grandmother put it on my skinned knee in the mid eighties.

    2. Re:Oxygen kills (no really) by swfranklin · · Score: 1

      H2O2 is still a common disinfectant, and while force-feeding it in massive quantities to mice can cause cancers, there's no evidence that I've ever heard to it being a human carcinogen. In fact, there are methods using H2O2 to treat cancer.

    3. Re:Oxygen kills (no really) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, but wouldn't you rather have C6H12O6?

    4. Re:Oxygen kills (no really) by Xrikcus · · Score: 1

      Peroxide is O2 2-, Superoxide is O2 1- and a radical.

      Hydrogen peroxide is used in low concentrations to disinfect contact lenses, and is EXTREMELY unpleasant if you don't neutralise it properly.

  260. No by The+Tyro · · Score: 1

    It is the opposite... Trust me on this one.

    Histologically, there is little doubt that MDMA can be harmful to serotonergic neurons, and that Prozac can block the neurotoxic effects of ecstasy, even when given hours afterward (this is in animal studies... it's still ethically frowned upon to carve up live human brains). The reports about prozac blocking ecstasy's clinical effects are all over the neutral--->negative spectrum.

    There is one study from 1993 where the researcher studied/asked eight ecstasy users their subjective opinions of E on prozac... they felt there was no difference. However, the sample size was small, and there is substantial anecdotal evidence from other users that Prozac substantially inhibits the "roll" from ecstasy.

    What is totally lacking, however, is any evidence that prozac increases ecstasy's subjective or histological effects.

    And there is NO substantial proof the harm to the neurons is permanent.

    I guess it depends on your definition of "substantial." There's certainly a growing body of evidence regarding MDMA... almost none of it good.

    --
    Even if a man chops off your hand with a sword, you still have two nice, sharp bones to stick in his eyes.
  261. Ex-smokers by freeweed · · Score: 1

    I personally agree with the smoking ban as well.. even though I'm an ex-smoker.

    You say that like it's a surprise, and I guess to many people it is. However, the most vocal and outspoken anti-smoking crowd is generally - you guessed it - ex-smokers. Non-smokers don't like the effects of smoking. EX-smokers don't like the effects, and also resent that others are still partaking in something they can no longer do. They have even more reason to be against other people enjoying it.

    I'm not implying that this is the case for you, but it's something I've noticed becoming more prevalent over the years, as more and more people kick the old death sticks.

    Personally, as an ex-smoker, I couldn't care less if other people want to kill themselves (like I almost did). But I do find it funny that people will go to a place where concentrated poison is served, music is blasted so loud that frequent patrons develop hearing problems after too long, fights between complete strangers often end up with someone in the hospital... and the big problem with these establishments is that "my clothes smell when I leave". :)

    I dunno, I guess the concept of opening a non-smoking bar never occured to the 75% of the population that doesn't smoke.

    --
    Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
  262. Worst. Grammar Nazi. Ever. by takshaka · · Score: 1

    He said, "This is simply an indication that 95% of the population is scientifically illiterate." instead of 'are'!

    And he is correct. Percent can take a singular or plural verb. Population is singular, so 95% of the population is a singular subject. Note that he also writes, "1% of congress men ever elected have any scientific background," because congressmen is plural.

  263. Re:The funny thing is, DHMO isn't even the right n by nallen · · Score: 1

    Like as in the naming convention, not chemically. The naming rules say you name the cation with a -nium suffix followed by the anion ending in -ide. ammo-nium hydrox-ide same rule generates hydro-nium hydrox-ide

    Get it?

  264. It depends on the pot as well by theblacksun · · Score: 1
    The marijuana plant itself is more complex than 99.9% of the public knows about. The drug-like effects can range from stimulant-like (I've clenched my jaw like a speed-freak after a couple bowls of some real uppy stuff), to depressant (Anyone who's smoked enough knows this is true), to psychedelic (small visual distortions, no true hallucinations in my experience anyway). It depends on the individual Marijuana plant, and all of those effects might be present.

    For example, some pot will speed you up right off the bat, then drop you off and make you want to pass out once you've passed peak. Others will speed you up and then you'll just slow back down to normal. Some will just knock you out, and some will make you just feel like crap. There's been an abhorently small amount of scientific work done on Cannabis, considering it's the most complicated drug around. All of those effects have only been linked to THC. The other cannabinoids play very small roles.

    The moral of the story is you have one substance with an huge range of effects. Why the hell hasn't it been studied more? I blame conservative Christians and the alcohol lobbists, but that's just me.

    --
    Ignorance kills, complacency kills, hatred kills, but usually not the ones guilty of them.
    1. Re:It depends on the pot as well by jimsum · · Score: 1

      I blame the same people. They don't want to test pot because all the studies show that it is nearly harmless.

      A big factor left out of these discussions is the level of experience with the drug. Everyone seems to forget the long learning curve for handling alcohol. It takes a while to learn to handle any drug, but at least with pot, an experienced smoker can accurately gauge how impaired they are.

      --
      -- Pot is safer than Beer
    2. Re:It depends on the pot as well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I blame conservative Christians

      Funny, considering the marijuana references in the bible. Jesus healed people with pot!

  265. It's a dessert topping! It's a floorwax! by uxo · · Score: 1

    Without explaining what it stands for (i.e., DHMO = dihydrogen monoxide) an acronym can seem pretty sinister. And DHMO sounds a little like DMSO (dimethyl sulfoxide), a carcinogenic agent...

  266. windows kill 1000x's more birds than windmills... by bani · · Score: 1

    ...so if they were true to their cause, they'd be out there campaigning to ban windows.

    birds killed annually, nationwide by:

    window panes (98 million)
    vehicles (60 million)
    communication towers (4 million)
    wind turbines (10,000 to 40,000)
    household cat (unknown, probably > 40,000 :-)

  267. Re:Our education is responsible for this, not desi by An+Onerous+Coward · · Score: 1

    Nope, it's a consequence. After all, the education system itself is one of those "products" designed for the lowest common denominator.

    Hmm... the Wikipedia article on the Montissori method reads like a PR brochure. Which says nothing about the method itself, only that someone somewhere accepted it uncritically.

    --

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

  268. well, part of it anyway... by jacobb · · Score: 1

    oxygen at very high concentrations is actually toxic. :-)
    the higher the atmospheric pressure, the more toxic it gets actually (IIRC). so the "move to a well ventilated area" part does make sense.

  269. Re:The funny thing is, DHMO isn't even the right n by Graff · · Score: 1
    Heh, heh, Incorrect information--Informative! Correct information--Informative! I'd love to cash in on some of that.

    I've often thought that the most successful trolls are probably the ones who post a reasonable, though incorrect, argument in one account and then post through another account an equally reasonable correction to the post. That way the troll picks up karma twice.

    There are a few such posts on Slashdot which make me think that there are trolls out there who use this method to inflate their karma. One wonders...
  270. The stupidity and dangers of not learning Latin... by ivoras · · Score: 1
    ... and Old Greek. Such confusion could and should be avoided just by learning what the formula really means in ordinary words!

    di-hydrogen-mono-(o)xide is two-hydrogen-one-oxygen in plain english! (Ok, so you also have to know that -oxide comes from oxygen, but that should be straightforward at least from chemistry classes).

    But noooooo, Latin is toooo hard for young children today...

    And I'm not buying that Latin is old, deprecated and unusable. It *is* in foundations of western civilisation!

    --
    -- Sig down
  271. welcome to america by maloneoni · · Score: 0

    "Never underestimate the stupidity of the American people." --P.T. Barnum

  272. The irony is tragic by ThousandStars · · Score: 1
    I find it somewhat ironic that a comment decrying scientific illiteracy gives no concrete data and no support to backup an argument based, at best, on anecdote.

    My favorite line is the first: "95% of the population is scientifically illterate." That's almost as good as 42% of all statistics being made up on the spot.

    That isn't to say that the public is a scientifically literate; but gauging the national rate of scientific literacy based on someone's ramblings is as wrong as, say, preparing to ban DHMO based on a slick website.



    (I'm not trying to insult the poster, and I think Sagan's book is excellent. For another book that has some thoughts on gullibility, see Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynmann by Richard Feynman. My favorite section deals with Feynmann and his habit of unlocking safes.)

    1. Re:The irony is tragic by David+Gould · · Score: 1


      That's almost as good as 42% of all statistics being made up on the spot.

      I thought it was 87%

      --
      David Gould
      main(i){putchar(340056100>>(i-1)*5&31|!!(i<6)<< 6)&&main(++i);}
    2. Re:The irony is tragic by jjhlk · · Score: 1

      I don't know his intent, but citing a stat such as 95% or 99% or 99.9% is sometimes just used to indicate a large majority, not any actual specific value. 99% of linguists agree with me. :)

  273. It's all southern California's fault by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They are the ones who fell for this. They are the ones who voted for Arnold. They aren't too bright.

  274. Re:You know they forgot one more by saskboy · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The scary thing about that site, is at first, and even 2nd glance, it is possible to think that the people writing it, actually believe what they are saying. The things are so crazy though, as to go beyond into satire.

    eg: "2nd Place: "Women Were Designed For Homemaking"
    Jonathan Goode (grade 7) applied findings from many fields of science to support his conclusion that God designed women for homemaking: physics shows that women have a lower center of gravity than men, making them more suited to carrying groceries and laundry baskets; biology shows that women were designed to carry un-born babies in their wombs and to feed born babies milk, making them the natural choice for child rearing; social sciences show that the wages for women workers are lower than for normal workers, meaning that they are unable to work as well and thus earn equal pay; and exegetics shows that God created Eve as a companion for Adam, not as a co-worker."

    --
    Saskboy's blog is good. 9 out of 10 dentists agree.
  275. Re:The funny thing is, DHMO isn't even the right n by Graff · · Score: 1
    The correct name is "dihydrogen oxide". Theres no need to put the "mono" on the oxygen.

    Yeah, IAAC here too. I agree with you that you don't need the "mono" part, but there are a few cases where it is used, such as N2O. N2O is commonly known as nitrous oxide but the systematic name for it is dinitrogen monoxide. You can see a listing of the names of various nitrogen oxides here.

    Pretty much it ends up boiling down to which usage was more popular. For most molecules the mono is dropped but there are a few molecules where it is kept. Another example is carbon monoxide. It could easily have been called carbon oxide but that form never really caught on.
  276. Right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's just replaced with stupidity.

  277. angry black man by Angry+Black+Man · · Score: 1

    An H2O molecule exhibits a hydrogen bond (talking about intramolecular forces, not referring to an actual bond) due to the difference in electronegativity between the two. However, it is by all means covalent. I doubt any chemist would consider H2O ionic. It exhibits similar properties due to the difference in electronegativity, without a doubt. That's basically all your post says --Theres a difference in electronegativity-- In so many words. However, the bonding characteristics are much different. H2O exhibits sp3 hybridization, meaning the orbitals OVERLAP each other. The electron is not transferred from one molecule to another. THe orbitals merely overlap.

    No matter how big the difference in electronegativity is, a sigma bond is still covalent.

    Good job getting your troll moderated up. Shows that not only is 95% of the total population scientifically illiterate, but so are 95% of the /. moderators. (Not critisizing, just observing).

    --
    the byproduct of years of oppression by the white man
  278. Re:Our education is responsible for this, not desi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Maybe they put something in your water... :).

    Probably due to excessive levels of Dihydrogen Monoxide. That stuff's insideous.

  279. Google Cache by daVinci1980 · · Score: 1

    For those of you who would like to see what the site looks like, here's a bunch of google caches.

    --
    I currently have no clever signature witicism to add here.
  280. Dear City of Aliso Viejo: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You have been trolled. You have lost. Have a nice day.

  281. Other areas of research? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Did he have other areas of research? Such as how fucking stupid people at slashdot can be?

    APPARANTLY NOT?

    You fucking MORONS.

  282. funny offtopic story by ocularDeathRay · · Score: 0

    Warning... OFF-Topic content below: ok this reminds me of a high school english class that I had. I had this teacher, Mr. Tupper. I really liked to fuck with him. He was a good guy with a good sense of humor, so we were always joking around in class. One day we get our weekly vocab. assignment and gullable is one of the words. Monday night every week we were supposed to go home and write down dictionary definitions of all the words. (I know... stupid busy work). Then for the rest of the week we would use that page of definitions to help with other assignments. This was a 10th grade class btw. So I went home and did my homework but left the definition of gullable blank. Then the next day the teacher always looked at our homework to make sure we had it done (since we needed that page to do tuesdays work). I walked into class a couple minutes late (as usual). He took one look at my homework and asked why I didn't define gullable. I told him it was really strange. I checked in 4 different dictionaries... all the ones at my house, and it wasn't in any of them. I told him even though I kind of know what it means I couldn't think of a good wording for the definition. I said I would really appreciate it if he would check his dictionary for me before we started class, so that I would be able to keep up. He said OH sure... I can't imagine why that wouldn't be in there. Are you sure you were spelling it correctly? I said I was very careful and checked several times. Which dictionaries did you use? I looked at his bookshelf to see he had Webster's so I said Random house and one or two others. I said I thought maybe it was technically a slang word or something. So he walked to the bookshelf determined to prove me wrong. He flipped through it and said oh... well it is in this one. I said "REALLY?" wow... what does it say? "someone who is easily fooled...." at this point he gave me a dirty look and the class completely fell apart laughing. It took him several minutes to restore order in the classroom... and kids made fun of him for the rest of the year. sorry.. I just had to share this one.

    --
    Obama is a twitter sock puppet
  283. Not that funny by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm not an idiot, and I've never heard water called dhmo. There's nothing overt on the site that would reveal it as a joke. The whole thing is about as funny to me as if some nerd walked into a gym and the muscleheads had him doing an exercise wrong for their amusement.

    1. Re:Not that funny by Random+Guru+42 · · Score: 1

      It's not supposed to be obvious. The joke is on the people who believe it, not the site itself. Duh.

      --
      Christopher S. 'coldacid' Charabaruk -- coldacid.net
  284. Re:The funny thing is, DHMO isn't even the right n by Larzarus · · Score: 1

    Given that the joke was aimed at people who couldn't figure out what dhmo was in the first place, the correctness of the various possible forms of the name took a back seat to whatever sounded scary when it was written.

  285. Re:The funny thing is, DHMO isn't even the right n by Aerion · · Score: 1

    The naming rules say you name the cation with a -nium suffix

    But you don't use a -nium suffix, you use the name of the cation as is, even if it doesn't end in -nium, e.g. ferric oxide, mercurous iodide. It's a coincidence that "ammonium" ends in -nium.

  286. Re:The funny thing is, DHMO isn't even the right n by yo303 · · Score: 1
    You are 100% correct, of course. But just like there are several delineations of acids, as you pointed out, we could have different ways to define ethers and alcohols.

    I would argue that the carbon atoms in simple alcohols don't actually do anything, except hold all the functional groups together. It's the backbone. In most reactions involving alcohols, all we see is bonding to the entire molecule, or at most one or more functional group substitutions. There are chain cracking reactions, of course, but in these cases we are not really looking at an "alcohol" reaction.

    In that sense, water is definitely an alcohol, in that it reacts in the same way that (say) ethanol does. A similar but weaker argument could be made for ethers.

    As for water being an acid, HOH most definitely "dissolves" in water, circular definitions aside. Liquid water is an equilibrium mixture of HOH, OH- and H3O+.

    yo.

  287. Sunscreen by HalliS · · Score: 2, Informative

    from the song Sunscreen (he propably stole it somewhere else)

    Live in "New York City" once, but leave before it makes you hard.
    Live in "Northern California" once, but leave before it makes you soft.



    I also liked this part:

    Accept certain inalienable truths:
    Prices will rise.
    Politicians will philander.
    You, too, will get old.

    And when you do, you'll fantasize that when you were young,
    prices were reasonable, politicians were noble,
    and children respected their elders.

    --


    My other UID is 1337
  288. Re:Discredit Tactic -- Is /. a CoIntelPro Agent no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... Why does Slashdot propagate this meme?

    1. Because damn morons keep falling for this "meme".

    2. Coddling idiots isn't as much fun.

    3. Fuckwits like yourself who can't comprehend the funny side of this.

    I mean seriously - this wasn't to discredit anyone. This is a general parody of knee-jerk reactionism (from left or right.) The fact that someone fell for it hook line and sinker makes it funny.

    Your "example" shows how poorly you understand this. Noone in California tried to outlaw capitalists because they are trying to cause a new world war. Especially because some dimwitted paralegal swallowed a huge load of patent BS that most gradeschool kids understand. I mean, if this is such a great and widespread tactic of those out to discredit "environmentalists" or some such, you'd think they'd have caught on by now.

    PS. Vote Green? I guess you're one of those idiots that fucked over Gore in 2000. Thanks for the Chimp, Nader!

  289. already banned by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I thought foam cups and packaging has been banned for a decade or more? I haven't seen fast food packaging or coffee cups or anything made of foam since about 1990...

  290. Penn and Teller censored? by driehuis · · Score: 1

    Apparently, Penn and Teller consist a national security risk. When I try to view http://www.sho.com/site/ptbs/home.do I get:

    Sorry,

    We at Showtime Online express our apologies; however, these pages are intended for access only from within the United States.


    What's next? Should I give them an SSN to view this web page? If so, whose SSN? A hair sample? Should I start shopping RoadRunner for an Open Proxy? I only have to look at the Received lines of the Herbal Viagra offerings in my Inbox for the shopping list :-)

    --

    Bert Driehuis -- All I asked was a friggin' rotatin' chair. Throw me a bone here, people.

    1. Re:Penn and Teller censored? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Me too (from Taiwan).
      Why do they censure themself ?

  291. Water eh? by Jexx+Dragon · · Score: 1

    I thought they were made of something else... Though I suppose they could very easily contain water. Interesting

    --
    I don't have time to comment my code, the program is late already.
  292. Educate yourself by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There is NO scientific evidence that MDMA causes any sort of long term damage to humans. Thousands of studies have been run and nothing conclusive has ever been produced. Although there may still be risks to consider, MDMA is approximately as risky as your average prescription medication. It's certainly far safer than the common recreational drugs, alcohol and cigarettes.

    If you are interested in the science of MDMA research, I highly recommend MAPS, especially
    this.

    For lighter reading with see MDMA.nu.

  293. Re:The funny thing is, DHMO isn't even the right n by nallen · · Score: 1

    You are thinking of the naming of metal cations, these are nonmetal cations. hence hydronium, ammonium, sulfonium, oxonium, carbonium, etc...

    In metal cations the suffix indicates oxidation state, ferric is Fe(II) ferrous is Fe(III) and so on, there is no good general rule, just generalites.

  294. Very funny - also MS website keeps doing weirdness by mrmeval · · Score: 1

    It took a moment to believe it wasn't a hoax played off a hoax. :-)

    Also MS's website seems to have some sort of overload codeing that plays weird with my browser.

    --
    I'd go on a Vegan diet but the delivery time from Vega is too long. --brownkitty
  295. I have one on my desk. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  296. Ob Homer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...Mono -- D'oh!

  297. learn to swim by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Some say the end is near. Some say we'll see armageddon soon. I certainly hope we will. I sure could use a vacation from this bullshit three ring circus sideshow of Freaks here in this hopeless fucking hole we call LA The only way to fix it is to flush it all away. Any fucking time. Any fucking day. Learn to swim, I'll see you down in Arizona bay.

  298. Mmmm, tastes like sweat! by mec · · Score: 1

    I can do 5-7 miles on a good day; it will be a while before I hit marathon levels.

    I like Gatorade precisely *because* it tastes like sweat. If I'm not exercising, I'm not at all tempted to drink up my stock!

    1. Re:Mmmm, tastes like sweat! by rjstanford · · Score: 1

      You could probably get there pretty quickly. I went from 2 miles to 26.2 in six months, with regular training... The second half of it is detailed on my training weblog. Its really pretty cool... the running, that is, not the website.

      --
      You're special forces then? That's great! I just love your olympics!
  299. future election campaigns by iamhassi · · Score: 1

    "don't vote for my competitors, they fell for the H20 prank!" and for those of you who say "it's the dumb paralegal's fault" remember someone had to approve the study to schedule it for a vote.

    --
    my karma will be here long after I'm gone
  300. -1 TROLL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This guy is so trolling.

  301. No. by Valdrax · · Score: 1

    No. If I recall correctly, he graduated from the U.S. Naval Academy.

    --
    If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
  302. Missing the point by Gorimek · · Score: 1

    You're right, of course, but also missing the point.

    The purpose of a 'Flammable' warning label is not to make a statement about chemical science, but to warn people that the content can be dangerous around fires.

    And that's an entirely real danger with oxygen canisters.

    If it shouldn't have a 'Flammable' label, what's the alternative? No warning at all? A minor chemical textbook printed on the canister?

  303. Funny.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Those also are the symptoms for excessive autoerotic stimulation.

    I might recommend, first and foremost, a more relaxed grip. Followed by a scaling back of such activity.

  304. DHMO poisoning? by interactive_civilian · · Score: 1
    Re:Come on CA (Score:3, Interesting)
    Heh...whoever modded the parent "interesting" must have had a bit too much DHMO today...

    Perhaps (s)he should dilute it with a little caffeine?

    ;-)

    --
    "Empathise with stupidity, and you're halfway to thinking like an idiot." - Iain M. Banks
  305. Thanks by The+Tyro · · Score: 1

    I do try to be worth reading, and I appreciate your comments.

    --
    Even if a man chops off your hand with a sword, you still have two nice, sharp bones to stick in his eyes.
  306. Re:A (corrected) poem. by renec · · Score: 1

    The correct version (or at least the version I heard, but it flows better and makes more sense, so I'm willing to call it more correct)

    Little Lucy in the lab
    Lying on the Floor
    For what she thought was H2O
    Was H2SO4

  307. Richest = Most Corrupt by SimHacker · · Score: 1
    Fox News is one of the most popular sources of news in the world, and they're also one of the least accurate, most corrupt, distorted, one sided, unfair, unbalanced bunch of liars on TV.

    Success doesn't equal integrity. Cheaters like the idiots at Fox News and the right wing zealots in Orange County make more money precisely because they're liars and parasites.

    -Don

    --
    Take a look and feel free: http://www.PieMenu.com
    1. Re:Richest = Most Corrupt by SpaceCadetTrav · · Score: 1

      Rich people are corrupt? Wow, how is that for a simple-minded generalization. Not to worry, some day you will figure out how to make a few bucks yourself and your view will correct itself.

  308. Yes, and I "nearly" responded seriously to this by Rogerborg · · Score: 1

    But then I realised that "nearly" means "didn't", so there's no story.

    --
    If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
  309. Further Analysis by virg_mattes · · Score: 1

    > THERE WAS A STUDY ABOUT THIS # YEARS AGO THAT PROVED IT WAS ALL NY..... OFf shore winds push it INTO NJ... you seem to forget the areas that smell are costal cities on the hudson and kill van kull.

    Feel free at any time to cite the study you refer to, because I'd be interested to read it. Offshore winds in NYC come from the south, and the only coastal city on the Hudson River is NYC. Therefore it'd seem that Connecticut or lower-upstate New York would be doing the complaining. I understand that areas like Carteret have complained about pollution from Staten Island, but for the most part it's NYC and its environs (and even some Long Island communitites, which is inexplicable to me) that complain about Newark and Jersey City.

    Virg

  310. Care to Explain by virg_mattes · · Score: 1

    > Very small stream of O2, lit it on fire, it burned.

    No, it didn't. Unless you'd care to explain what chemical reaction, exactly, is taking place when oxygen burns? Mix O2 with...what? More O2? Oxygen doesn't burn, because burning is the mixing of some fuel with oxygen, and oxygen doesn't mix with itself.

    Give it another try.

    Virg

    1. Re:Care to Explain by cavebear42 · · Score: 1

      Alright, first im sorry for being an ass yesterday. second, i was told O2 was flammable, i wanted to see so i tried. i was using gas from the university labled O2, it did burn. To the best of my knowlage, there was no other gas in suffient quanitys to burn in that O2 stream, but I'm telling you, I tried it and it did.

  311. Caffeine! by bjsmith257 · · Score: 1

    nah, I'd rather have C8N4O2H10

  312. Possibilities by virg_mattes · · Score: 1

    If you lit a fine stream, and it maintained a visible flame, then there are a few things I can guess at, although I can't say for sure if any are correct.

    1.) The O2 was mislabeled.
    2.) The O2 was not pure. In the presence of pure oxygen, even miniscule amounts of impurity can cause visible burning, so it wouldn't take much.
    3.) The valve itself was producing plasma on the edge of the flow. Did the tank have a metal valve and spout? If so, try it with a ceramic spout, since if you light a flame near the lip of a metal spout, a pure oxygen flow can actually cause the top of the valve to "burn" (usually it'll just glow, but perhaps it could produce visible flame).

    I'd have to stretch to come up with others, so I'll stick by these for now. As I said, oxygen all by itself doesn't burn in the absence of other fuels, although it can cause runaway burning in stuff that doesn't normally burn in atmosphere (in pure oxygen, you can light a steel wool pad on fire, where it won't hold a flame in regular air). The reason it's considered so dangerous around flame is the runaway oxidizing properties, such that smoking a cigarette in a hospital near an oxygen supply can cause the cigarette to flare up or even pop. But without fuel, oxygen isn't flammable, it's merely an oxidizer. Take note that other chemicals like gaseous chlorine can do this too, so sometimes you'll see chlorine marked "oxidizer" in bottles, even though there's no oxygen involved. Again, not flammable by itself, but it accelerates burning fast.

    Virg

  313. let's get the fallacies straight. by Mr.+Underbridge · · Score: 1
    "The Sierra club. They've since come on board but they had an unfortunate sound bite.Cuisinarts of the Sky [wind-works.org]"

    Guilt by association.

    Not so, as it was a Sierra employee. They can regret an employee's actions, but they are responsible for them, as they themselves admit. For what it's worth, I admitted they regretted the quote, and never implied it was a corporate position.

    "Also, I'm generally skeptical of anyone who makes up names for groups of people like "Environmental-Deniers." You seem to suffer from delusion."

    Ad Hominem.

    That's true. But ironically, yours was too, by stating that anyone who attributes "bird killer" quotes is an "Environmental-Denier." And I still think that's a bit paranoid. In any case, there was no refutable statement made (I can't literally prove such a conspiracy doesn't exist - similar to "white crow").

    "Because 1) many people, well-informed or not, do believe it, even if they're not spokespeople for major organizations."

    Straw Man.

    Not true. I contended that self-labelled environmentalists believe that wind power kills birds. My analysis above supports that theory. You countered by saying that intelligent people don't believe "birdkiller" theories - which is a borderline strawman itself. Address the question - do any people believe wind power kills birds? If so, it refutes your ad hominem/conspiracy theory. A straw man would be my refuting something you didn't say, but which is easier to refute. I'm not - you claimed that all instances of claimed "birdkiller" beliefs are fraudulent, and I refute that.

    "2) The Sierra club put its foot in its mouth with that "Cuisinart" quote. It was catchy, and it caught on."

    Begging the Question

    Not even close - you'd only be correct if a representative of Sierra didn't say that. One did. And the Sierra club admits it, as was in the link I posted.

    I think you just evidinced a new class of meta-logical-fallacy - using a random and misattributed string of logical-fallacy terms in a misguided attempt to refute an argument, without using any actual analysis.

  314. hello- this is Nathan Zohner by rh9shrike · · Score: 1

    wow- I just checked my e-mail, and was told to go check slashdot. Wow- just wanted to say hi, its awesome to be mentioned on /.! (and by the way, I use redhat9 and check my knewsticker every day (kinda bummed I missed that one) -nathan