No, the calibration is accurate by measuring the rollout circumference of the wheel. I think I can trust Cat Eye's computations.
I don't know when I hit 35 MPH or how long I am at that speed-- I don't dare look at the cyclometer on those downhills. I check the max speed when I have slowed down to 18-20 MPH. I am consistently faster than 32 MPH in those places, but 35 MPH is rare for me. Might have to do with a tailwind or catching drafts off passing vehicles, I never thought about it.
What wheel circumference did you use with the gear inch calculator? 99 seems pretty low, even my junkie 1970 27" no brand ten speed with alpine gearing had 104 gear inches. (I should count teeth on the small sprocket. Maybe its smaller than I remember)
Adults around here ride various types of pedal bikes; the push bikes are the tiny things without pedals for toddlers.
No, they're called balance bikes.
No. "Balance bikes" are known as "push bikes" That's why when you Google for "push bike" you get all those articles on balance bikes. You silly thing.
What does this prove? Well, for one thing it demonstrates that a person who thinks they are clever, and knows about LMGTFY and Google, will still fail it if he doesn't use the smarts that he thinks he has.
A bit of background for those who don't know about Oregon bicycle politics. Bicycling in Oregon is booming. It is bringing in a lot of tourist dollars because we've got some really great places to ride, and it has become a major, and fast growing, style of commuting in Portland and some other towns.
And that is pissing off a lot of automobile drivers because they think that striping shoulders as bike lanes and paving bike paths is somehow using up precious tax dollars that should be spent on their part of the streets. What they cannot get through their heads is that every bicyclist they see is one less car in the traffic they are dealing with, and one more parking space available to them. Nor are they willing to recognize that most bicyclists also own cars and pay their share of gasoline taxes, license fees, and so forth.
Plus, it pisses them off that they have to wait in traffic inching forward at the intersections while the bicyclists go whizzing by in their bike lanes all the way up to the head of the line. That just isn't fair!
I regularly reach 35 MPH on downhills around Portland OR, such as Greeley Ave and Time Oil Rd, and have been passed by cyclists doing 15+ MPH faster. I ride a Specialized aluminum 700-C frame, 28 mm tires at 110 psi, standard road bike, no clip-in pedals or handlebar extensions. My big chainwheel is 52 T, my small cog is 14 T, I'll leave it to you to figure out the gear inches (hint: somewhere around 110, AIR). My highest cadence used to be 128 but that was years ago, and I could not keep that up for more than a sprint of a minute or so.
I don't know how much faster the bike could go with a foolhardy rider in excellent shape. I've been bicycling for more than 50 years, and I don't fold up as aerodynamically as I once did, and I've got more fear at high speeds than I once did. So I don't push the bike to its limits.
Of course I don't ride up Greeley since Williams is a less steep alternate route that is only about 3 miles longer. I do sometimes ride up the Time Oil hill, in my lowest granny, a little faster than walking at maybe 5 or 6 MPH, and usually completely blown out by the time I've topped that 400 yard cliff.
If I lived in the mountains, I would buy a slower, more stable bike like the one parent post describes. But I live in the city and ride mostly on clean, smooth streets and bike paths. My bike is worthless on gravel, lousy on dirt.
Bicycles have changed a lot in the 40 years since that song was last sung. and I don't think that "push bike" ever got much use outside of Australia.
I don't know about Australia, but I think much of it has also changed.
Anyway, thanks for the link. That clarifies where the "push bike" comment might have come from (very far from North American, European, and Asian bicycle communities)
Maybe that's true in the Netherlands. On many of the roads in around Portland Oregon cyclists regularly reach 50 MPH (a tad faster than 80 KPH).
A 20 KPH crash on a push bike can be as bad as a 60 KPH crash in a car, easily fatal if you're not wearing a helmet.
Define "push bike"; I don't know what you are talking about. Adults around here ride various types of pedal bikes; the push bikes are the tiny things without pedals for toddlers.
A cyclist crashing at 14 MPH (faster than 20 KPH) is unlikely to sustain anything worse than a bit of road rash if he's using good equipment (gloves and helmet being part of good equipment). His vehicle will usually be undamaged as well. A similar crash in a car will often result in a busted headlight or damaged bumper. Since cars are designed to crush in a controlled way.
Normal cycling pace is 20-25 KPH because this is how fast the traffic stuck behind them is moving.
Only when hill climbing or riding into a strong headwind. Commuting cyclists in Portland generally ride at 15 - 25 MPH, often faster than cars in downtown traffic. That's one of the reasons why more people are now commuting by bike.
I bought my first automotive GPS when I was doing a driving tour through cities I had not visited for over 30 years. It proved its worth on that trip. It not only led me through the spaghetti maze of Boston streets-- just as bad as it was back in the day but now with lots of changes-- it also routed me around road construction and a traffic jam. No amount of studying a paper map will do that.
I use a GPS on my android phone on the bike. It is not only aware of current traffic conditions, but it also tells me where the nearest pub is when I'm ready for a break. The bicycle mode is getting better, though it still doesn't know about some of the alleyways that can avoid busy streets. But then, paper maps are even worse for that.
If you are going to get an android for some other reason, it makes sense to install a GPS map app on it-- it probably comes with one. Depending on the price of the Hammerhead, it might be a good accessory. There are times when I'm sharing the road in city traffic when there is no place to stop to read a map or cell phone; hell, there are times when I can't even look at the street signs between dealing with traffic, potholes, and road debris, even at 10 or 12 mph.
Something that is often overlooked is that before the adoption of sewage systems, most groups of people had a strong incentive to move around a lot. And since it was not very pleasant to move into an area the neighbors had just vacated, groups tended to move into those areas where no other group had gone before. At least, not for a long time.
That meant they would cross paths with distant groups fairly frequently. When that happens, there are two things that can occur: either the groups fight, or they party. Fighting is hard work and often painful. Partying can be a lot of fun, and moves the genes around.
Probably everyone on slashdot knows somebody who has moved to get away from the sh*tty mess they made of the old place. It is an old gene thing that still expresses among the less evolved.
I was talking about the USA and others taking a harsher stance against Al Qaida, etc, than war allows.
Rabid animals need to be destroyed. Ideologies that convince persons it is a good thing to strap on a suicide vest are similar to rabies and should be treated the same way.
Agreed. Countries go to war with other countries. There is a large and ancient body of law governing the behavior of countries at war with each other. Not that those laws have not been violated many times, but they do exist.
The USA can never go to war against Al Qaida, since that is not a country nor even an organization. It is at most a band of nihilistic psychopaths with severe, shared delusions about what reality is really like, and a social structure that reinforces their delusional state.
The best way to handle them would be to declare each one a psychiatric case who represents a profound danger to others, and institutionalize them indefinitely on that basis. We have everything we need to do that, except the political guts to make the distinction between what is a religion and what is a shared psychopathic delusion. But I really think that sane followers of Islam would support making a distinction between the practice of their religion and the practices of Al Qaida, et al.
While the effect of the change to FLOSS is relatively minor, making the change was a major undertaking. If nothing else, it shows one way in which old free-but-not-FLOSS apps could be rewritten into FLOSS form.
And now with POV-Ray's ray tracing algorithms opened up, it will be interesting to see what other FLOSS projects like Blender can do with it. Blender already offers the use of Game Render, Cycles Render (not quite finished yet but beginning to look pretty sweet), and the old time Blender Render. Adding POVray Render would be a nice fourth option, and probably not too hard to do, now that the code is available for use.
I always favored "Gratis / Libre Open Source Software", as being the most descriptive label. But GLOSS never caught on. Too bad, really. I think a tool chain with a high level of GLOSS would outshine a commercial tool chain in oh so many ways.
That's just dumb. When reality is unknown, you make your decisions on the best available evidence - period.
That approach can get you in a lot of trouble. Remind me never to fly in any aircraft that you have designed.
There are plenty of situations where the smartest thing to do is to base your decisions on the worst case scenario, even when the available evidence suggests that it will not happen. All the evidence suggests that I am unlikely to be involved in any near fatal automobile collisions in the next 6 months. But I still want that airbag and telescoping steering column, and I'll still wear my seatbelt.
That seems to be why so many scientists are part of the AGW consensus: because they think "We can live with it, even though it might be wrong". The idea of living with something that might be wrong is often preferable to not living at all.
I agree that there IS a lot pseudo-science here, and that I have fallen into a nasty trap.
What can I say? This is not the first time an AC troll has gotten me good, and it probably will not be the last.
Now get thee back under that dark, damp, cobwebby bridge where thou belongest! Or I shall sprinkle thee with Troll-B-Gone powder and there will be nothing left around here but some grins and giggles.
I can offer links to bibliographies concerning the persecution of witches in the medieval period. But the focus of my work is on popular articles that influence today's neopagan and witch communities, so my reading is almost exclusively of derivative works.
Chaos also occurs in the dynamic evolution of a system, so it's hard to see the connection you're implying with statistics.
When I turn that around, it seems to say that statistics is only of value in systems that have fully matured. Which sounds like most of the time statistics have no value.
Is that correct? Or is there some other way to reverse the quotation?
The bad news is that it is getting harder and harder to sort the science reported in journals from the papers whose purpose is to generate or preserve revenue streams for the researchers (or the corporations for which they are agents).
Agreed. P = 0.05 was good enough in my high school days, when handheld calculators were the best available tool in most situations, and you had to carry a couple of spare nine volt batteries for the thing if you expected to keep it running through an afternoon lab period.
We have computers, sensors, and methods for handling large data sets that were impossible to do anything with back in the day before those first woodburning "minicomputers" of the 1970s. It is ridiculous that we have not tightened up our criteria for acceptance since those days.
Hell, when I think about it, using P = 0.05 goes back to my Dad's time, when he was using a slide rule while designing engine parts for the SR-71 Blackbird. That was back in the 1950s and '60s. We should have come a long way since then. But have we?
Unless of course we happen to be working in a chaotic system where strange attractors mean there can be no centrality to the data.
Chaos theory is a lot younger than the central limit theorem. The situation might be similar to the way Einstein's theory of relativity has moved Newton's three laws from a position of central importance in all physics to something that works well enough in a small subset. A subset that is extremely important in our daily life, but still a subset.
Some portions of a chaotic system will be consistent with what the central limit theorem would predict. Other data sets from the same system, uh, no.
An important question I do not believe has been answered yet (I am an armchair follower of this stuff, neither expert nor student) is whether all the systems we work with where the CLT does seem to hold are merely subsets of larger systems. A related question would be whether there is any test that can be applied to a discrete data set that rule out its being a subset of a larger chaotic process.
Idunno. Can you even call them runtime errors in a setup like this?
This is using a Linux VM, emulated in Javascript, in a sandbox, inside your browser. I don't think the thing could possibly run. Or even walk. I think the fastest it could go would be a slow crawl.
Yeah, he was happier back in those days. Until His Mom took away those toys and told Him to clean up His room. He's been in the sulking place ever since. Now he just want to throw things at the walls, and shove those who want to friend him too much under the bus.
Mom's pretty cool, though. Cakes and ale parties just about anytime you ask for one, and if you promise not to make a mess, She'll get out the fingerpaints or anything else you want to play with, and even help you through the tough spots, like when you mix the colors together wrong and get something yuckie. She knows how to fix that, and if you come up with something really neat, she'll change the whole room to match your theme. Like what she did when Schroedinger did that sketch of a cat. Wow!
Send or post a short note each day where your supervisor can/will read it -
* What I finished - accomplishments, problems solved
* What's coming up - milestones, issues or possible stumbling blocks
Doing this weekly or monthly would usually be sufficient. Daily would be seen as pestering. You should keep a daily journal that includes your ToDo list, that shows the above, but that's not for communicating with anyone. That's CYA when things go wrong. You let your boss know that you are keeping it, but you don't let him or anyone else see it unless you have to defend yourself. You can do things like pipe up in a team meeting "Hey, I ran into a problem like that a couple of years ago. I could rummage around in my notes, and tell you how I fixed it if you want." Give others the opportunity to invite you to help them. While establishing this as a valid part of your workload, and not you trying to make brownie points instead of doing your job.
At the same time that you send your weekly or monthly "Here's what I'm doing" email to the boss (and to no one else), send out an email to the boss AND colleagues about the upcoming problems you anticipate, especially anything where you think you may need to do some research. The formula is "I'm going to need to expurgilate the southern database in a week or two, but I haven't done that for a while. Any ideas on where I can read up on the process? How about if I just do a normal cathartic exorcism of the index. I don't thing that would work but maybe I'm missing something?"
Spice that up with random requests for non-technical help and reportage of non-technical problems: "My Harley's clutch is beginning to slip a little, makes it hard to pop a good wheelie. Any suggestions about good bike mechanics?" Or "They are are going to be tearing up Interstate 12, starting next Monday. What are you guys going to use as a detour?"
Slashdot Mirror
No, the calibration is accurate by measuring the rollout circumference of the wheel. I think I can trust Cat Eye's computations.
I don't know when I hit 35 MPH or how long I am at that speed-- I don't dare look at the cyclometer on those downhills. I check the max speed when I have slowed down to 18-20 MPH. I am consistently faster than 32 MPH in those places, but 35 MPH is rare for me. Might have to do with a tailwind or catching drafts off passing vehicles, I never thought about it.
What wheel circumference did you use with the gear inch calculator? 99 seems pretty low, even my junkie 1970 27" no brand ten speed with alpine gearing had 104 gear inches. (I should count teeth on the small sprocket. Maybe its smaller than I remember)
We have this Internet thing, it cures ignorance: http://lmgtfy.com/?q=push+bike
Adults around here ride various types of pedal bikes; the push bikes are the tiny things without pedals for toddlers.
No, they're called balance bikes.
No. "Balance bikes" are known as "push bikes" That's why when you Google for "push bike" you get all those articles on balance bikes. You silly thing.
What does this prove? Well, for one thing it demonstrates that a person who thinks they are clever, and knows about LMGTFY and Google, will still fail it if he doesn't use the smarts that he thinks he has.
Someone is full of it.
Nuff said.
A bit of background for those who don't know about Oregon bicycle politics. Bicycling in Oregon is booming. It is bringing in a lot of tourist dollars because we've got some really great places to ride, and it has become a major, and fast growing, style of commuting in Portland and some other towns.
And that is pissing off a lot of automobile drivers because they think that striping shoulders as bike lanes and paving bike paths is somehow using up precious tax dollars that should be spent on their part of the streets. What they cannot get through their heads is that every bicyclist they see is one less car in the traffic they are dealing with, and one more parking space available to them. Nor are they willing to recognize that most bicyclists also own cars and pay their share of gasoline taxes, license fees, and so forth.
Plus, it pisses them off that they have to wait in traffic inching forward at the intersections while the bicyclists go whizzing by in their bike lanes all the way up to the head of the line. That just isn't fair!
I regularly reach 35 MPH on downhills around Portland OR, such as Greeley Ave and Time Oil Rd, and have been passed by cyclists doing 15+ MPH faster. I ride a Specialized aluminum 700-C frame, 28 mm tires at 110 psi, standard road bike, no clip-in pedals or handlebar extensions. My big chainwheel is 52 T, my small cog is 14 T, I'll leave it to you to figure out the gear inches (hint: somewhere around 110, AIR). My highest cadence used to be 128 but that was years ago, and I could not keep that up for more than a sprint of a minute or so.
I don't know how much faster the bike could go with a foolhardy rider in excellent shape. I've been bicycling for more than 50 years, and I don't fold up as aerodynamically as I once did, and I've got more fear at high speeds than I once did. So I don't push the bike to its limits.
Of course I don't ride up Greeley since Williams is a less steep alternate route that is only about 3 miles longer. I do sometimes ride up the Time Oil hill, in my lowest granny, a little faster than walking at maybe 5 or 6 MPH, and usually completely blown out by the time I've topped that 400 yard cliff.
If I lived in the mountains, I would buy a slower, more stable bike like the one parent post describes. But I live in the city and ride mostly on clean, smooth streets and bike paths. My bike is worthless on gravel, lousy on dirt.
Bicycles have changed a lot in the 40 years since that song was last sung. and I don't think that "push bike" ever got much use outside of Australia.
I don't know about Australia, but I think much of it has also changed.
Anyway, thanks for the link. That clarifies where the "push bike" comment might have come from (very far from North American, European, and Asian bicycle communities)
Cyclists dont reach 80 KPH.
Maybe that's true in the Netherlands. On many of the roads in around Portland Oregon cyclists regularly reach 50 MPH (a tad faster than 80 KPH).
A 20 KPH crash on a push bike can be as bad as a 60 KPH crash in a car, easily fatal if you're not wearing a helmet.
Define "push bike"; I don't know what you are talking about. Adults around here ride various types of pedal bikes; the push bikes are the tiny things without pedals for toddlers.
A cyclist crashing at 14 MPH (faster than 20 KPH) is unlikely to sustain anything worse than a bit of road rash if he's using good equipment (gloves and helmet being part of good equipment). His vehicle will usually be undamaged as well. A similar crash in a car will often result in a busted headlight or damaged bumper. Since cars are designed to crush in a controlled way.
Normal cycling pace is 20-25 KPH because this is how fast the traffic stuck behind them is moving.
Only when hill climbing or riding into a strong headwind. Commuting cyclists in Portland generally ride at 15 - 25 MPH, often faster than cars in downtown traffic. That's one of the reasons why more people are now commuting by bike.
I bought my first automotive GPS when I was doing a driving tour through cities I had not visited for over 30 years. It proved its worth on that trip. It not only led me through the spaghetti maze of Boston streets-- just as bad as it was back in the day but now with lots of changes-- it also routed me around road construction and a traffic jam. No amount of studying a paper map will do that.
I use a GPS on my android phone on the bike. It is not only aware of current traffic conditions, but it also tells me where the nearest pub is when I'm ready for a break. The bicycle mode is getting better, though it still doesn't know about some of the alleyways that can avoid busy streets. But then, paper maps are even worse for that.
If you are going to get an android for some other reason, it makes sense to install a GPS map app on it-- it probably comes with one. Depending on the price of the Hammerhead, it might be a good accessory. There are times when I'm sharing the road in city traffic when there is no place to stop to read a map or cell phone; hell, there are times when I can't even look at the street signs between dealing with traffic, potholes, and road debris, even at 10 or 12 mph.
From the "Anthropology in a Nutshell" lectures:
Something that is often overlooked is that before the adoption of sewage systems, most groups of people had a strong incentive to move around a lot. And since it was not very pleasant to move into an area the neighbors had just vacated, groups tended to move into those areas where no other group had gone before. At least, not for a long time.
That meant they would cross paths with distant groups fairly frequently. When that happens, there are two things that can occur: either the groups fight, or they party. Fighting is hard work and often painful. Partying can be a lot of fun, and moves the genes around.
Probably everyone on slashdot knows somebody who has moved to get away from the sh*tty mess they made of the old place. It is an old gene thing that still expresses among the less evolved.
I was talking about the USA and others taking a harsher stance against Al Qaida, etc, than war allows.
Rabid animals need to be destroyed. Ideologies that convince persons it is a good thing to strap on a suicide vest are similar to rabies and should be treated the same way.
Agreed. Countries go to war with other countries. There is a large and ancient body of law governing the behavior of countries at war with each other. Not that those laws have not been violated many times, but they do exist.
The USA can never go to war against Al Qaida, since that is not a country nor even an organization. It is at most a band of nihilistic psychopaths with severe, shared delusions about what reality is really like, and a social structure that reinforces their delusional state.
The best way to handle them would be to declare each one a psychiatric case who represents a profound danger to others, and institutionalize them indefinitely on that basis. We have everything we need to do that, except the political guts to make the distinction between what is a religion and what is a shared psychopathic delusion. But I really think that sane followers of Islam would support making a distinction between the practice of their religion and the practices of Al Qaida, et al.
Why is such a stupid comment like the parent modded "insightful"? Paranoid, yes. Insightful, no.
Perhaps because there is no "1+ paranoid" and "1+ informative" is an even poorer choice?
And Julian does need to keep in mind that just because he might truly be paranoid, that doesn't mean the bastards are not out to get him.
Every TSA payday, the terrorists have won. While some level of screening makes sense, the cost of the TSA security theater does not.
The USA needs to grow a pair, and remember its roots: the cost of freedom is an acceptance of risk.
While the effect of the change to FLOSS is relatively minor, making the change was a major undertaking. If nothing else, it shows one way in which old free-but-not-FLOSS apps could be rewritten into FLOSS form.
And now with POV-Ray's ray tracing algorithms opened up, it will be interesting to see what other FLOSS projects like Blender can do with it. Blender already offers the use of Game Render, Cycles Render (not quite finished yet but beginning to look pretty sweet), and the old time Blender Render. Adding POVray Render would be a nice fourth option, and probably not too hard to do, now that the code is available for use.
I always favored "Gratis / Libre Open Source Software", as being the most descriptive label. But GLOSS never caught on. Too bad, really. I think a tool chain with a high level of GLOSS would outshine a commercial tool chain in oh so many ways.
That's just dumb. When reality is unknown, you make your decisions on the best available evidence - period.
That approach can get you in a lot of trouble. Remind me never to fly in any aircraft that you have designed.
There are plenty of situations where the smartest thing to do is to base your decisions on the worst case scenario, even when the available evidence suggests that it will not happen. All the evidence suggests that I am unlikely to be involved in any near fatal automobile collisions in the next 6 months. But I still want that airbag and telescoping steering column, and I'll still wear my seatbelt.
That seems to be why so many scientists are part of the AGW consensus: because they think "We can live with it, even though it might be wrong". The idea of living with something that might be wrong is often preferable to not living at all.
you're spouting a lot of pseudo-science here
I agree that there IS a lot pseudo-science here, and that I have fallen into a nasty trap.
What can I say? This is not the first time an AC troll has gotten me good, and it probably will not be the last.
Now get thee back under that dark, damp, cobwebby bridge where thou belongest! Or I shall sprinkle thee with Troll-B-Gone powder and there will be nothing left around here but some grins and giggles.
I can offer links to bibliographies concerning the persecution of witches in the medieval period. But the focus of my work is on popular articles that influence today's neopagan and witch communities, so my reading is almost exclusively of derivative works.
Here goes:
* Hanover.edu bibliography of both primary sources and recent scholars
* Kings.edu bibliography on the subject
* Jenny Gibbons, "Recent Developments in the Study of The Great European Witch Hunt", originally in __Pomegranate__, 1998 issue 5, since on many web sites
Hope this helps.
Chaos also occurs in the dynamic evolution of a system, so it's hard to see the connection you're implying with statistics.
When I turn that around, it seems to say that statistics is only of value in systems that have fully matured. Which sounds like most of the time statistics have no value.
Is that correct? Or is there some other way to reverse the quotation?
The bad news is that it is getting harder and harder to sort the science reported in journals from the papers whose purpose is to generate or preserve revenue streams for the researchers (or the corporations for which they are agents).
Agreed. P = 0.05 was good enough in my high school days, when handheld calculators were the best available tool in most situations, and you had to carry a couple of spare nine volt batteries for the thing if you expected to keep it running through an afternoon lab period.
We have computers, sensors, and methods for handling large data sets that were impossible to do anything with back in the day before those first woodburning "minicomputers" of the 1970s. It is ridiculous that we have not tightened up our criteria for acceptance since those days.
Hell, when I think about it, using P = 0.05 goes back to my Dad's time, when he was using a slide rule while designing engine parts for the SR-71 Blackbird. That was back in the 1950s and '60s. We should have come a long way since then. But have we?
Unless of course we happen to be working in a chaotic system where strange attractors mean there can be no centrality to the data.
Chaos theory is a lot younger than the central limit theorem. The situation might be similar to the way Einstein's theory of relativity has moved Newton's three laws from a position of central importance in all physics to something that works well enough in a small subset. A subset that is extremely important in our daily life, but still a subset.
Some portions of a chaotic system will be consistent with what the central limit theorem would predict. Other data sets from the same system, uh, no.
An important question I do not believe has been answered yet (I am an armchair follower of this stuff, neither expert nor student) is whether all the systems we work with where the CLT does seem to hold are merely subsets of larger systems. A related question would be whether there is any test that can be applied to a discrete data set that rule out its being a subset of a larger chaotic process.
Idunno. Can you even call them runtime errors in a setup like this?
This is using a Linux VM, emulated in Javascript, in a sandbox, inside your browser. I don't think the thing could possibly run. Or even walk. I think the fastest it could go would be a slow crawl.
Yeah, he was happier back in those days. Until His Mom took away those toys and told Him to clean up His room. He's been in the sulking place ever since. Now he just want to throw things at the walls, and shove those who want to friend him too much under the bus.
Mom's pretty cool, though. Cakes and ale parties just about anytime you ask for one, and if you promise not to make a mess, She'll get out the fingerpaints or anything else you want to play with, and even help you through the tough spots, like when you mix the colors together wrong and get something yuckie. She knows how to fix that, and if you come up with something really neat, she'll change the whole room to match your theme. Like what she did when Schroedinger did that sketch of a cat. Wow!
Send or post a short note each day where your supervisor can/will read it -
* What I finished - accomplishments, problems solved
* What's coming up - milestones, issues or possible stumbling blocks
Doing this weekly or monthly would usually be sufficient. Daily would be seen as pestering. You should keep a daily journal that includes your ToDo list, that shows the above, but that's not for communicating with anyone. That's CYA when things go wrong. You let your boss know that you are keeping it, but you don't let him or anyone else see it unless you have to defend yourself. You can do things like pipe up in a team meeting "Hey, I ran into a problem like that a couple of years ago. I could rummage around in my notes, and tell you how I fixed it if you want." Give others the opportunity to invite you to help them. While establishing this as a valid part of your workload, and not you trying to make brownie points instead of doing your job.
At the same time that you send your weekly or monthly "Here's what I'm doing" email to the boss (and to no one else), send out an email to the boss AND colleagues about the upcoming problems you anticipate, especially anything where you think you may need to do some research. The formula is "I'm going to need to expurgilate the southern database in a week or two, but I haven't done that for a while. Any ideas on where I can read up on the process? How about if I just do a normal cathartic exorcism of the index. I don't thing that would work but maybe I'm missing something?"
Spice that up with random requests for non-technical help and reportage of non-technical problems: "My Harley's clutch is beginning to slip a little, makes it hard to pop a good wheelie. Any suggestions about good bike mechanics?" Or "They are are going to be tearing up Interstate 12, starting next Monday. What are you guys going to use as a detour?"
Wikepedia says:
1997: 52.8% of USA electricity from coal
2009: 45.0%
2011: 42% US Energy Info Admin says
2012: 37% of USA electricity from coal
Coal is a has-been. Approaching one-third is not the same as "almost one half". Parent post fails it.