Pencils never contained lead though. It's a misunderstanding from when graphite was discovered back in the 16th century and people thought it was a type of lead and called it "black lead" or "plumbago".
Actually the paint that was used on pencils contained lead in the past. Considering how many kids chewed on pencils in grade school, this wasn't the best idea.
"The work also fingers a possible culprit"
Anthropomorphic Global Warming?
(not a troll, just a funny, vote me down if you will)
Don't be stupid. It was obviously caused by US Navy sonar. Yes, our sonar is THAT powerful.
Actually, that highway is a toll road and they didn't have exact change. If you ever saw a 20 meter tractor trailer try to make a U-turn, just imaging what it must have been like trying to get 30, 30 meter whales to turn around. It's no wonder they didn't make it.
why, exactly, should they have that right? it's fair enough for a business to exclude particular individuals who have caused problems in the past (e.g. shoplifiting or being an annoying PITA), but to exclude people simply because they are a member of a particular group ("women", "gays", "blacks", "teenagers", whatever) - or *appear* to be a member of such a group - is discrimination....and that's definitely unethical and almost certainly illegal.
I agree with you completely on this. I have, and have had, gay, lesbian, and bi friends. I don't get it, and it's not my thing. But I also don't understand a lot of things that friends of mine who are from other cultures do or believe either. But I don't have to. I can accept that they think differently than I do, even if I disagree. What I do get sick of is when gay and lesbian groups go on a tirade against companies whose owners/CEO openly admit that they don't agree with the LGBT lifestyle. I am tired of hearing about calls to boycott a company simply because the CEO doesn't agree with them. Not that they refuse service or to do business, but simply don't agree. How is that being tolerant? I feel like everyone has to be "tolerant" of each other. But only of those that are on the approved list.
It reminds me of some old Steppenwolf lyrics:
You're free to speak your mind my friend,
as long as you agree with me.
Don't criticize the fatherland,
Or those who shape your destiny
'Cause if you do,
you'll lose your job, you mind, and all the friends you knew.
We'll send out all our boys in blue
They'll find a way to silence you
that door is already wide open - "no gays" is no different to "no blacks". it's the same fucking thing.
From a religious perspective, there is though. I'm not justifying this belief, or even supporting it. But many religions specifically are not tolerant of LGBT people. I'm not in that category. But as long as they aren't harming anyone, I don't care what they think. They have the freedom of religion in the US, and as long as they don't hurt anyone, so what. How is being opposed to a lifestyle "hate speech", but excoriating them from the opposite viewpoint not?
It's ok, because the screen in my center console can pull up Facebook, so I'll just take my eyes off the road and read it there.
To me, this kind of thing is more dangerous. Not only because you can get on Facebook, but because there is no tactical feedback when you need to do anything. A touchscreen in a car means you absolutely have to take your eyes off the road to do just about anything.
Don't get me wrong, having a HUD in front of your eyeballs while driving is a terrible idea, but let's think about the big picture here.
I'm going to guess that you've never driven a car with a HUD. They are not positioned "in front of your eyeballs". They are normally centered above the steering wheel and at the bottom of the windshield, just above/on the hood. It's unlikely to overlap anything you are moving behind. Perhaps it would at a red light when you are stopped. But if it's covering a moving vehicle that you are following, you are insanely close and should be ticketed for tailgating, or reckless driving.
I have one car (we have 4 in our household) with a HUD currently and I don't think I'll buy another car that doesn't have one. It takes up about a five inch square at the bottom of my windshield, and I can still see theough it. But I never have to take my eyes off the road to check my speed, RPMs, fuel level, and fluid temperatures. In all honesty, I think they should be on every car. It can also be turned off if you don't want to see it.
Also remember that the Navy flies too, only they use 1,000 foot long runways that float around and does just about EVERYTHING the guys in Blue can. The Air Force rarely uses anything under 6,000 foot, so who has the better pilots?
The Air Force does. The Navy has aviators, not pilots.;)
The A-10 is on the chopping block, as is the U2. What I don't get about the elimination of those is that one has proven itself extremely cost-effective in close-quarters ground support (as in using bullets, rather than relying on rockets and bombs) and extremely durable when taking fire (flying back with a wing missing) and the other has been extremely effective for quick-turnaround intelligence.
The USAF has been trying to kill the A-10 for over a decade. They want nothing but new shiney high tech computerized aircraft. The A-10 is the exact opposite of this. It doesn't matter that is damn near the perfect aircraft for close ground support. Or its original purpose of killing tanks. The real problem is they can't be "networked" with the newer generation aircraft. To make matters worse, they are all in need of a major overhaul. It's one hell of a tough airframe, but simply flying them in combat situations puts a lot of stress on them. Most have flown many more hours than they were ever intended to. Since the USAF doesn't want big ugly (this is the opposite of how ground troops feel about them) brute of a plane, there will be no replacement.
the u2 really can be replaced by drones. The long retired SR-71 would make more sense as we still don't have anything as fast. But the U2 is a fairly easy target these days. It's also a very difficult plane to fly.
Both programs are effective in the kind of engagements that we've found ourselves in during the last couple of decades and both are paid for. It's maintenance only, as opposed to development.
Maintenance can be quite a bit more expensive than you would think. Especially when you are talking about an airframe that has already had to have an overhaul that was never planned for in the original design as they never thout there would be as many hours put on it as have been. The army wanted to take over the A-10 program at one point. Of course as the USAF sprouted from the Army Air Corps, this will never happen.
If Comcast is unable to provide the bandwidth they have sold to their customers, they are guilty of selling something they don't actually possess. I believe there is a word for this.
A friend of mine who is a mechanic got tired of his tools being stolen around the garage. Even ones that were engraved. He found a company that made tools that were fluorescent pink. He hasn't had a single tool stolen since.
More to the point, the way the world is going, a kid born today as a very high chance of leading a life of debt, unemployment, poverty, starvation, war, and whatever else the future has in store, before dying.
As far as we're concerned, my s.o. and I, the best time for fatherhood is never, as we reckon giving life today isn't really a gift.
It's kinda funny how the last three or four generations have felt the world was a better place and is going "down the tubes". I know the people I've known in the last three generations before me felt this way. And now I do too. And everyone I know in the two or three generations after me seem to think so too. I don't know about most people, but I tend to remember most things as being better than the actually were. We also have the 24 hour news channels that do their best to scare the shit out of us. After, that's what sells. We can also find even more news about how horrific the world is on the internet now. And even more people who agree with us. I'm not sure which is worse. If the world is falling apart, or that continually thinking it is, is just a failing of human nature.
the strong magnetic field of the MRI was proven genotoxic in mice.
Can you provide a link for this? I'd be very interested in what is considered a "strong magnetic field". Compared to the earth's, a standard 1.5 Tesla mri is strong. But I know of no issues with that. The RF pulses can be an issue as they could literally cook you. But the FDA has very conservative requirements as to how long you can be in a scanner. All scanners have a built in cut off that you cannot override. The only possible way would be to enter the patients weight in to the console incorrectly.
Research scans for mice can last 24 hours. I believe the highest Tesla animal scanner is 17 T. Currently the highest field strength that the FDA allows for is 3T. There are experimental scanners for humans that are 7T. But due to the RF pulse frequency that is needed to disrupt the magnetic field of this strength, the time a person can be scanned is very limited.
Considering this is Apple we are talking about, it goes without saying that it's not "free as in speech", doesn't it? Or have they suddenly embraced GPL and I missed it?
It's also not "free as in Beer" either. Otherwise I wouldn't be required to purchase their product first.
No. We should maintain our advantage over other nations. Especially China. After all China is probably building up a giant stockpile of nukes right now as we speak!!.
I realize this is/., so to rtfa is just crazy talk. But I did skim through it. We currently have 3000 retired warheads that are simply sitting in storage decaying. These aren't sitting on top of missiles. Or even being maintained. They are costing taxpayers who knows how much money to sit in a building somewhere. Since the cost of enriching this stuff beyond what is needed to generate power has alread done. This seems like an even bigger waste to me. As they would probably have to reprocess it to use in a weapon again anyhow.
They destroy fruit crops and try to survive through the winter by invading houses. I think I've found one flying around my house just about every week this winter. I read about a house around here that they estimated had 25, 000 of them in it.
They have no natural predators in the US. The only thing I've seen eat them is my dog. Which would be funny, except he's a 95 pound Doberman and scratches the hell out of my hardwood floors jumping and chasing after them.
Or at least avoid any software-controlled devices capable of killing you. And hope you never need a CAT scan. Yeah, can't think of any examples of microwaved people, but you *know* that somewhere in the software there's an extremely rare corner case that will fail to shut off the x-ray source.
This one was operator error. But you'd think there would be better software checks in place so this would be impossible.
The crazy thing is, is that MRI scanners have required the weight of the patient to be entered for many years so it won't cook the patient with RF pulses. The good new is that the CT incidents in the links above caused a nationwide acknowledgement of the dangers of radiation exposure in CT scanners. So it really helped to create the current generation of scanners with significantly lower dosage.
I don't know what the temperature delta is, as I didn't see it listed anywhere. Still, this is being done with an off the shelf product. I would imagine a purpose designed version would be able to eliminate the issue, if it is one.
I'm sure someone figured it out long ago and I'm sure fishing line has probably already been used for this purpose.
Why are you so sure?
This is just the first time someone was willing to swallow their pride and publish it in a scientific journal.
What pride? It's a legitimate discovery. With all of the dumb shit that gets patented these days, I'm sure someone would have rushed to the USPTO with it
I'm sure there are scientists and engineers out there saying "no duh" and "thanks captian obvious" to this article.
Why? With all of the research going into this field, you really think that something that works well and is cheap would be completely ignored? I think it's more likely that people had the knowledge that mono-filament line had these properties. But never thought that it would have the capacity to contract and relax with the amount of force that it does. So they never bothered to test it until now.
Monofilament fishing line has been around since 1939 and the most popular type that is used today has been on the market since 1959. Considering all of the uses it has been repurposed for in the last half a century, I wouldn't consider it new, except in a geological timeframe.
Things like this discovery always make me laugh. People will make comments about how obvious this was. But it wasn't until the first time someone figured it out. Otherwise it should have happened sometime in the last fifty years.
What scans of Alex the African-Gray parrot would have shown. Or any talking bird for that matter. Actually, I would guess that many birds have a similar "voice region". Dolphins and whales too for that matter.
Slashdot Mirror
Pencils never contained lead though. It's a misunderstanding from when graphite was discovered back in the 16th century and people thought it was a type of lead and called it "black lead" or "plumbago".
Actually the paint that was used on pencils contained lead in the past. Considering how many kids chewed on pencils in grade school, this wasn't the best idea.
"The work also fingers a possible culprit" Anthropomorphic Global Warming? (not a troll, just a funny, vote me down if you will)
Don't be stupid. It was obviously caused by US Navy sonar. Yes, our sonar is THAT powerful.
Actually, that highway is a toll road and they didn't have exact change. If you ever saw a 20 meter tractor trailer try to make a U-turn, just imaging what it must have been like trying to get 30, 30 meter whales to turn around. It's no wonder they didn't make it.
why, exactly, should they have that right? it's fair enough for a business to exclude particular individuals who have caused problems in the past (e.g. shoplifiting or being an annoying PITA), but to exclude people simply because they are a member of a particular group ("women", "gays", "blacks", "teenagers", whatever) - or *appear* to be a member of such a group - is discrimination....and that's definitely unethical and almost certainly illegal.
I agree with you completely on this. I have, and have had, gay, lesbian, and bi friends. I don't get it, and it's not my thing. But I also don't understand a lot of things that friends of mine who are from other cultures do or believe either. But I don't have to. I can accept that they think differently than I do, even if I disagree. What I do get sick of is when gay and lesbian groups go on a tirade against companies whose owners/CEO openly admit that they don't agree with the LGBT lifestyle. I am tired of hearing about calls to boycott a company simply because the CEO doesn't agree with them. Not that they refuse service or to do business, but simply don't agree. How is that being tolerant? I feel like everyone has to be "tolerant" of each other. But only of those that are on the approved list.
It reminds me of some old Steppenwolf lyrics:
that door is already wide open - "no gays" is no different to "no blacks". it's the same fucking thing.
From a religious perspective, there is though. I'm not justifying this belief, or even supporting it. But many religions specifically are not tolerant of LGBT people. I'm not in that category. But as long as they aren't harming anyone, I don't care what they think. They have the freedom of religion in the US, and as long as they don't hurt anyone, so what. How is being opposed to a lifestyle "hate speech", but excoriating them from the opposite viewpoint not?
It's ok, because the screen in my center console can pull up Facebook, so I'll just take my eyes off the road and read it there.
To me, this kind of thing is more dangerous. Not only because you can get on Facebook, but because there is no tactical feedback when you need to do anything. A touchscreen in a car means you absolutely have to take your eyes off the road to do just about anything.
Don't get me wrong, having a HUD in front of your eyeballs while driving is a terrible idea, but let's think about the big picture here.
I'm going to guess that you've never driven a car with a HUD. They are not positioned "in front of your eyeballs". They are normally centered above the steering wheel and at the bottom of the windshield, just above/on the hood. It's unlikely to overlap anything you are moving behind. Perhaps it would at a red light when you are stopped. But if it's covering a moving vehicle that you are following, you are insanely close and should be ticketed for tailgating, or reckless driving.
I have one car (we have 4 in our household) with a HUD currently and I don't think I'll buy another car that doesn't have one. It takes up about a five inch square at the bottom of my windshield, and I can still see theough it. But I never have to take my eyes off the road to check my speed, RPMs, fuel level, and fluid temperatures. In all honesty, I think they should be on every car. It can also be turned off if you don't want to see it.
Also remember that the Navy flies too, only they use 1,000 foot long runways that float around and does just about EVERYTHING the guys in Blue can. The Air Force rarely uses anything under 6,000 foot, so who has the better pilots?
The Air Force does. The Navy has aviators, not pilots. ;)
How many of the comments on this article will be from shills?
All of them. /. only has a thousand or so actual users. The rest work for the NSA. And the /. Server is actually at Fort Meade.
Be seeing you. ;)
The A-10 is on the chopping block, as is the U2. What I don't get about the elimination of those is that one has proven itself extremely cost-effective in close-quarters ground support (as in using bullets, rather than relying on rockets and bombs) and extremely durable when taking fire (flying back with a wing missing) and the other has been extremely effective for quick-turnaround intelligence.
The USAF has been trying to kill the A-10 for over a decade. They want nothing but new shiney high tech computerized aircraft. The A-10 is the exact opposite of this. It doesn't matter that is damn near the perfect aircraft for close ground support. Or its original purpose of killing tanks. The real problem is they can't be "networked" with the newer generation aircraft. To make matters worse, they are all in need of a major overhaul. It's one hell of a tough airframe, but simply flying them in combat situations puts a lot of stress on them. Most have flown many more hours than they were ever intended to. Since the USAF doesn't want big ugly (this is the opposite of how ground troops feel about them) brute of a plane, there will be no replacement.
the u2 really can be replaced by drones. The long retired SR-71 would make more sense as we still don't have anything as fast. But the U2 is a fairly easy target these days. It's also a very difficult plane to fly.
Both programs are effective in the kind of engagements that we've found ourselves in during the last couple of decades and both are paid for. It's maintenance only, as opposed to development.
Maintenance can be quite a bit more expensive than you would think. Especially when you are talking about an airframe that has already had to have an overhaul that was never planned for in the original design as they never thout there would be as many hours put on it as have been. The army wanted to take over the A-10 program at one point. Of course as the USAF sprouted from the Army Air Corps, this will never happen.
If Comcast is unable to provide the bandwidth they have sold to their customers, they are guilty of selling something they don't actually possess. I believe there is a word for this.
Profit?
Didn't we give the telecoms a shitload of money during the Clinton years to build out high speed internet?
I thought the last of the C-123's that were used to spray Agent Orange were destroyed in 2010. I didn't RTFA, so I don't know if the planes in question are still in service.
A friend of mine who is a mechanic got tired of his tools being stolen around the garage. Even ones that were engraved. He found a company that made tools that were fluorescent pink. He hasn't had a single tool stolen since.
More to the point, the way the world is going, a kid born today as a very high chance of leading a life of debt, unemployment, poverty, starvation, war, and whatever else the future has in store, before dying.
As far as we're concerned, my s.o. and I, the best time for fatherhood is never, as we reckon giving life today isn't really a gift.
It's kinda funny how the last three or four generations have felt the world was a better place and is going "down the tubes". I know the people I've known in the last three generations before me felt this way. And now I do too. And everyone I know in the two or three generations after me seem to think so too. I don't know about most people, but I tend to remember most things as being better than the actually were. We also have the 24 hour news channels that do their best to scare the shit out of us. After, that's what sells. We can also find even more news about how horrific the world is on the internet now. And even more people who agree with us. I'm not sure which is worse. If the world is falling apart, or that continually thinking it is, is just a failing of human nature.
the strong magnetic field of the MRI was proven genotoxic in mice.
Can you provide a link for this? I'd be very interested in what is considered a "strong magnetic field". Compared to the earth's, a standard 1.5 Tesla mri is strong. But I know of no issues with that. The RF pulses can be an issue as they could literally cook you. But the FDA has very conservative requirements as to how long you can be in a scanner. All scanners have a built in cut off that you cannot override. The only possible way would be to enter the patients weight in to the console incorrectly.
Research scans for mice can last 24 hours. I believe the highest Tesla animal scanner is 17 T. Currently the highest field strength that the FDA allows for is 3T. There are experimental scanners for humans that are 7T. But due to the RF pulse frequency that is needed to disrupt the magnetic field of this strength, the time a person can be scanned is very limited.
As in Beer or Speech?
Considering this is Apple we are talking about, it goes without saying that it's not "free as in speech", doesn't it? Or have they suddenly embraced GPL and I missed it?
It's also not "free as in Beer" either. Otherwise I wouldn't be required to purchase their product first.
So, it's not free at all.
Where can I download my free copy of OSX?
right here.
They do require that you have an existing Intel Mac to put it in and a free App Store account to download it with,
That's not exactly free, is it?
MSFT, the only company that actually charges money for a consumer OS.
Where can I download my free copy of OSX?
No. We should maintain our advantage over other nations. Especially China. After all China is probably building up a giant stockpile of nukes right now as we speak!!.
I realize this is /., so to rtfa is just crazy talk. But I did skim through it. We currently have 3000 retired warheads that are simply sitting in storage decaying. These aren't sitting on top of missiles. Or even being maintained. They are costing taxpayers who knows how much money to sit in a building somewhere. Since the cost of enriching this stuff beyond what is needed to generate power has alread done. This seems like an even bigger waste to me. As they would probably have to reprocess it to use in a weapon again anyhow.
They destroy fruit crops and try to survive through the winter by invading houses. I think I've found one flying around my house just about every week this winter. I read about a house around here that they estimated had 25, 000 of them in it.
They have no natural predators in the US. The only thing I've seen eat them is my dog. Which would be funny, except he's a 95 pound Doberman and scratches the hell out of my hardwood floors jumping and chasing after them.
Or at least avoid any software-controlled devices capable of killing you. And hope you never need a CAT scan. Yeah, can't think of any examples of microwaved people, but you *know* that somewhere in the software there's an extremely rare corner case that will fail to shut off the x-ray source.
Something like this?
This one was operator error. But you'd think there would be better software checks in place so this would be impossible.
The crazy thing is, is that MRI scanners have required the weight of the patient to be entered for many years so it won't cook the patient with RF pulses. The good new is that the CT incidents in the links above caused a nationwide acknowledgement of the dangers of radiation exposure in CT scanners. So it really helped to create the current generation of scanners with significantly lower dosage.
I don't know what the temperature delta is, as I didn't see it listed anywhere. Still, this is being done with an off the shelf product. I would imagine a purpose designed version would be able to eliminate the issue, if it is one.
However from Science Daily, The muscle strokes also are reversible for millions of cycles as the muscles contract and expand under heavy mechanical loads.". I wish they would have better explained what they mean by millions though. There's a pretty big difference between 2 million and 800 million. But again, 2 million for an off the shelf product that costs less than $10 is pretty cool if you ask me.
I'm sure someone figured it out long ago and I'm sure fishing line has probably already been used for this purpose.
Why are you so sure?
This is just the first time someone was willing to swallow their pride and publish it in a scientific journal.
What pride? It's a legitimate discovery. With all of the dumb shit that gets patented these days, I'm sure someone would have rushed to the USPTO with it
I'm sure there are scientists and engineers out there saying "no duh" and "thanks captian obvious" to this article.
Why? With all of the research going into this field, you really think that something that works well and is cheap would be completely ignored? I think it's more likely that people had the knowledge that mono-filament line had these properties. But never thought that it would have the capacity to contract and relax with the amount of force that it does. So they never bothered to test it until now.
Monofilament fishing line has been around since 1939 and the most popular type that is used today has been on the market since 1959. Considering all of the uses it has been repurposed for in the last half a century, I wouldn't consider it new, except in a geological timeframe.
Things like this discovery always make me laugh. People will make comments about how obvious this was. But it wasn't until the first time someone figured it out. Otherwise it should have happened sometime in the last fifty years.
"If you think confiscating aluminum foil to prevent a solar powered bomb attack
I think the important news here is that terrorists are also concerned about the environment and are switching to green energy sources.
You remind me of my wife, and this kind of "logic" is why women are arguably slightly worse writers.
If you think that is nonsense, than the whole original sexist line of argument is as well.
So what's your excuse?
What scans of Alex the African-Gray parrot would have shown. Or any talking bird for that matter. Actually, I would guess that many birds have a similar "voice region". Dolphins and whales too for that matter.