Which is why you need the two magic phrases: "Am I free to go?", "I want a lawyer".
Seriously, hours of a moron trying to "verbal" a confession out of someone when he had the whole and entire evidence in his possession. This is a perfect example, you are never helping yourself by cooperating with this crap.
Nitrogen can't just "not work". It displaces oxygen in the blood.
Errr, you may be thinking of carbon monoxide (or even carbon dioxide). Nitrogen makes up nearly 80% of the air you're breathing right now. While it's absorbed by the blood, it doesn't displace oxygen (or we'd all be dead.)
If a nitrogen-based execution system fails to kill the prisoner, it's because they're still getting too much oxygen. But they don't die horribly as with many other systems like gas chambers, electric chair, hanging, decapitation, lethal injection, if the N2-systems fail they just don't die. [There is a risk of a near-failure leaving them alive but brain damaged due to partial oxygen deprivation, but they just need to increase the N2 flow to finish the job.]
Attempting to provoke an emotional response via trick questions or questions designed to insult or get the interviewee to take the bait and say something offensive is also dishonest, unless you are administering a voigt-kompf test.
I had an interview where the interviewer offhandedly threw in "Of course, no one like doing [job]" while complaining about having to do the job I was applying for.
To this day, I still don't know whether it was meant to be a "trick question", or they really had no sense of irony.
"...but.. I... do."
[The manhole cover question annoys me, because the supposedly correct answer is probably wrong. Pointing out the probably correct answer then makes you look like a smart-arse, and costs you the interview anyway. (Manhole covers are round because manholes are round, because pipes are round, because a cylinder is the strongest shape cheaply/easily manufactured with basic technology.)]
I use element hider to manually get rid of elements within the site that aren't ads. Pop-up boxes (WOULD YOU LIKE TO SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER), slide-out or slide-over elements (LIKED THIS? YOU'LL FUCKING LOVE THESE), follow-me side-bars that jitter and spasm when I scroll, pretty much all floating banners, any blinking/scrolling sidebar widgets (LOOK AT OUR FUCKING TWITTER FEED), and pop-hover social media button (PLEASE SHARE THIS, SHARE IT, WHY AREN'T YOU FUCKING SHARING IT.)
Eventually I get the article, the actual thing I'm there for, and I read that article. Oh how I read that article.
and ignore completely that 10x worse things have happened all throughout the earth's history.
No. They often look at periods of sharp temperature rises in the past to see what the effects were. There are a few extinction events that give us an idea of what a sharp temperature rise does. Also, there's concern that moderate temp rises in the past sometimes triggered sudden CO2 releases, which then caused more warming, which... This includes the biggest extinction event in Earth's history (Permian–Triassic). They need to understand the mechanisms behind that positive feedback to build them into their modern projections. Likewise, when it didn't happen.
And, of course, there's the ice-core research to track the more recent history, last few hundred thousand years. This gives us a better idea of the "baseline", from where we can spot modern changes.
Paleoclimatology is a major player in climate change research.
Actually in my experience, the term AGW is more commonly used by people who know nothing about anthropogenic global warming.
[More recently it's starting being used outside the denier community, but for awhile it was a fairly good identifier of people who had never stepped outside the tent.]
Should I ever be in a position to haul people out of a low-oxygen environment you just saved multiple lives.
Wow. I hope that makes up somewhat for my own inevitable cowardice.
OBTW, don't hyperventilate before you go in. If you flush your lungs of CO2, some people can pass out before they realise they need to breathe. And if you pass out in the Bad Room, you're back to square one.
I'm suddenly very, very glad that my time doing superconductor research in college didn't end up killing me - we boiled off great tanks of liquid nitrogen and helium into engineering labs with no special ventilation,
Yeah, using N2 (or LN) is not really that dangerous, you have to have a really high flow of gas (and/or small room) to displace enough normal air. There's a bunch of PPM-gases that are much more dangerous, CO2/CO/etc. But it's kind of insidious and unexpected when it does happen.
[Side note: There was a sharp drop in suicides when countries switched from "coal-gas" ovens to fairly pure natural gas. The CO in coal gas was toxic at PPMs, whereas methane has to physically displace the air. Made it harder to kill yourself, so a bunch of people couldn't be bothered.]
you rub his nose in it so that he will know what trouble you mean, you paddle him so that he darn well won't do it again
Just for the record, this is not a recommended method of house-training puppies.
If the puppy starts to urinate inside, you immediately pick him up (this should make him stop) and take him outside to a spot in the yard where you want him to urinate, then put him down. Ideally he will finish. If so, you praise him, pat him, and let him back inside if he wants. If not, you pour a little water on the ground and let him sniff it. After a few times, he will associate urinating with going outside, specifically to that spot. Then he will start to want to go outside, in order to urinate.
[This reverse-association method also works for teaching them to sit/etc. You can say the word you want associated with the action after the puppy spontaneously does it, (ie, the puppy sits down, you quickly say, "Sit! Good boy!") and he will soon associate the word with the action, even when you start saying the word first.]
If you don't notice immediately, you do nothing. (Well, clean it up, thanks.) The puppy isn't able to associate the delayed punishment with the "crime". (At best, you associate fear/punishment with urinating. Ie, if you smack or scold him, he pisses.) That's probably what took the protagonist so long - " "Did you housebreak him?" "Err . . . yes, sir. Eventually." It was my slowness in this that caused my mother to rule that dogs must stay out of the house."
Simply picking up the puppy when he pisses (or craps) is sufficient negative reinforcement. When followed with the positive reinforcement at the appropriate piss-site, you get an extremely quick association developed. Much much faster than the old smack-him-and-rub-his-nose-in-it, and with fewer unintended behavioural side-effects.
There's probably a deeper lesson here about juvenile delinquents too. But honestly, you're starting so far behind, let's just stick to puppies for now.
You'd think the death penalty states would create a co-operatively owned production plant to make the small doses required. (And the precursors, and back far enough up the chain to reach raw feed-stocks that aren't at risk of boycotts.) Or failing that, at least one death-penalty state smart enough to create a state-owned plant and sell the anaesthetic to the other death-penalty states at significant profit.
High level opiate doses have wildly different effects on normal people; throw in tolerance effects in junkies and it's even worse. They aren't uniform enough to be defined in legislation and handled by non-medical prison staff. (Anaesthesiologists don't participate in death penalties, I think are forbidden from doing so not just by their oath, but by their licensing board.)
All of the other methods had failure rates high enough to traumatise the people watching. Which is why lethal injection was created.
If it can be proven without a shadow of a doubt that the person accused did the deed,
And given the number of people released from death row after if was proven that they were innocent; and given the even larger number unsafe convictions due to corrupt prosecutors, bad (or excluded) evidence, incompetent/lazy/drunk/senile defenders and judges, and of course kill-all-niggers jurors in death-penalty states; the US justice system clearly fails that measure. So game over? Death penalty fails to pass the first hurdle? Can we stop now?
Your scenario sounds much more like a toxic/knockout gas of some sort than nitrogen, unless people are *really* careless
People have died from this. Not just from nitrogen leaks, but also from metal tanks (or ship's ballasts) rusting enough when water is drained to reduce the oxygen levels in the trapped air. There have apparently been cases of entire work-crews (or families on farms) dying one after another as they attempt to rescue the others. Usually followed by poison-gas panic when the next group of people see the piles of dead bodies.
How exactly would holding your breathe help if the problem is just that you're not getting any more oxygen when you breathe?
When you breath un-oxygenated air, your body removes oxygen from the blood. Hence it takes much less time to pass out (and die) from breathing nitrogen, then from holding your breath.
And oxygen deprivation gives no warnings. (Actually it does, but a symptom is that you aren't aware enough to notice.) Whereas holding your breath gives you a clear sense of how long you've been holding your breath. When you can't take it, you run out of the room into fresh air, ideally while someone else takes over.
It would be better if you had a simple portable oxygen bottle, but beggars choice. Wait for the authorities and the people inside are dead. Risk your life intelligently, and they might be recovered into fresh air before they die.
the one who were trying to protect from unnecessary cruelty and suffering.
Us. The ones we're trying to protect from unnecessary cruelty and suffering is us. That's why people oppose the death penalty, it hurts us; and why advocates keep switching to more "humane" methods as one-by-one the previous ones fail to live up to their promise, and to society's standards.
We used to draw and quarter. "Quarter" is a literal thing, ie, tear into four parts. With horses. And in public, to cheering crowds. Then nooses, to "humanely" strangle them. Then nooses and trap-doors to "humanely" break their necks. Then non-public executions, because we're civilised, see. Then most of us banned it completely, but the US continued trying to find "humane" methods. Cyanide, electrocution, drug cocktails...
Just use normal ventilation. Nitrogen isn't poisonous, it only kills if it displaces enough oxygen. The leak has to completely replace the air in the room (well, more than half anyway.). Unlike, say, carbon monoxide, which only needs to reach 50-100 parts per million or so.
[The industrial danger is when there's gas bottles stored in a sealed room, for example, which is entered after a long period. "Imma get me some gas bottle". Thud. "Ohnoes bob collapse, me go help". Thud. "Ohnoes bill and bob collapse, me go help." Thud. "Ohnoes, everyone collapse, much poison gas, me leave them to die and evacuate building instead of just calling for help and taking turns holding breath to drag them into fresh air..."]
Nitrogen doesn't need a "gas chamber". Just a mask and reservoir bag (aka non-rebreather mask). Cost: $20 for the disposable mask. A few bucks per cubic metre for high-grade nitrogen. (I'd also add a bubbler to remove any odours, and warm and humidify the gas.)
a fixed aim bench rifle of sufficient bore directly to the head
Judging from bolt-guns at slaughterhouses, there's an error rate. And the result of an error is nasty. (Whereas if the nitrogen doesn't work, it just doesn't work.)
This is the problem with all methods of execution. The guillotine sometimes wouldn't cut all the way through. The noose wouldn't break their neck (or the rope would break). The cyanide wouldn't release properly. The electric chair wouldn't make proper contact through the skin, burning them alive instead of instantly electrocuting them. And sometimes the anaesthetic doses for lethal injection go wrong, so the person wakes up as the kill-you-horribly part is injected; or they use the wrong drugs. This the advantage of nitrogen, anything less than a kill is benign.
or we could just make life without parole the top possible penalty and save a ton of money AND make errors more reversible
Slashdot Mirror
Police in the US (and hence the FBI) have been allowed, by repeated court rulings, to lie to and trick suspects during an interrogation.
Which is why you need the two magic phrases: "Am I free to go?", "I want a lawyer".
Seriously, hours of a moron trying to "verbal" a confession out of someone when he had the whole and entire evidence in his possession. This is a perfect example, you are never helping yourself by cooperating with this crap.
Am I free to go? [No.] I want a lawyer.
Nitrogen can't just "not work". It displaces oxygen in the blood.
Errr, you may be thinking of carbon monoxide (or even carbon dioxide). Nitrogen makes up nearly 80% of the air you're breathing right now. While it's absorbed by the blood, it doesn't displace oxygen (or we'd all be dead.)
If a nitrogen-based execution system fails to kill the prisoner, it's because they're still getting too much oxygen. But they don't die horribly as with many other systems like gas chambers, electric chair, hanging, decapitation, lethal injection, if the N2-systems fail they just don't die. [There is a risk of a near-failure leaving them alive but brain damaged due to partial oxygen deprivation, but they just need to increase the N2 flow to finish the job.]
Attempting to provoke an emotional response via trick questions or questions designed to insult or get the interviewee to take the bait and say something offensive is also dishonest, unless you are administering a voigt-kompf test.
I had an interview where the interviewer offhandedly threw in "Of course, no one like doing [job]" while complaining about having to do the job I was applying for.
To this day, I still don't know whether it was meant to be a "trick question", or they really had no sense of irony.
"...but.. I... do."
[The manhole cover question annoys me, because the supposedly correct answer is probably wrong. Pointing out the probably correct answer then makes you look like a smart-arse, and costs you the interview anyway. (Manhole covers are round because manholes are round, because pipes are round, because a cylinder is the strongest shape cheaply/easily manufactured with basic technology.)]
"Sigh. You fuck one goat..."
I use element hider to manually get rid of elements within the site that aren't ads. Pop-up boxes (WOULD YOU LIKE TO SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER), slide-out or slide-over elements (LIKED THIS? YOU'LL FUCKING LOVE THESE), follow-me side-bars that jitter and spasm when I scroll, pretty much all floating banners, any blinking/scrolling sidebar widgets (LOOK AT OUR FUCKING TWITTER FEED), and pop-hover social media button (PLEASE SHARE THIS, SHARE IT, WHY AREN'T YOU FUCKING SHARING IT.)
Eventually I get the article, the actual thing I'm there for, and I read that article. Oh how I read that article.
and ignore completely that 10x worse things have happened all throughout the earth's history.
No. They often look at periods of sharp temperature rises in the past to see what the effects were. There are a few extinction events that give us an idea of what a sharp temperature rise does. Also, there's concern that moderate temp rises in the past sometimes triggered sudden CO2 releases, which then caused more warming, which... This includes the biggest extinction event in Earth's history (Permian–Triassic). They need to understand the mechanisms behind that positive feedback to build them into their modern projections. Likewise, when it didn't happen.
And, of course, there's the ice-core research to track the more recent history, last few hundred thousand years. This gives us a better idea of the "baseline", from where we can spot modern changes.
Paleoclimatology is a major player in climate change research.
Actually in my experience, the term AGW is more commonly used by people who know nothing about anthropogenic global warming.
[More recently it's starting being used outside the denier community, but for awhile it was a fairly good identifier of people who had never stepped outside the tent.]
Should I ever be in a position to haul people out of a low-oxygen environment you just saved multiple lives.
Wow. I hope that makes up somewhat for my own inevitable cowardice.
OBTW, don't hyperventilate before you go in. If you flush your lungs of CO2, some people can pass out before they realise they need to breathe. And if you pass out in the Bad Room, you're back to square one.
I'm suddenly very, very glad that my time doing superconductor research in college didn't end up killing me - we boiled off great tanks of liquid nitrogen and helium into engineering labs with no special ventilation,
Yeah, using N2 (or LN) is not really that dangerous, you have to have a really high flow of gas (and/or small room) to displace enough normal air. There's a bunch of PPM-gases that are much more dangerous, CO2/CO/etc. But it's kind of insidious and unexpected when it does happen.
[Side note: There was a sharp drop in suicides when countries switched from "coal-gas" ovens to fairly pure natural gas. The CO in coal gas was toxic at PPMs, whereas methane has to physically displace the air. Made it harder to kill yourself, so a bunch of people couldn't be bothered.]
you rub his nose in it so that he will know what trouble you mean, you paddle him so that he darn well won't do it again
Just for the record, this is not a recommended method of house-training puppies.
If the puppy starts to urinate inside, you immediately pick him up (this should make him stop) and take him outside to a spot in the yard where you want him to urinate, then put him down. Ideally he will finish. If so, you praise him, pat him, and let him back inside if he wants. If not, you pour a little water on the ground and let him sniff it. After a few times, he will associate urinating with going outside, specifically to that spot. Then he will start to want to go outside, in order to urinate.
[This reverse-association method also works for teaching them to sit/etc. You can say the word you want associated with the action after the puppy spontaneously does it, (ie, the puppy sits down, you quickly say, "Sit! Good boy!") and he will soon associate the word with the action, even when you start saying the word first.]
If you don't notice immediately, you do nothing . (Well, clean it up, thanks.) The puppy isn't able to associate the delayed punishment with the "crime". (At best, you associate fear/punishment with urinating. Ie, if you smack or scold him, he pisses.) That's probably what took the protagonist so long - " "Did you housebreak him?" "Err . . . yes, sir. Eventually." It was my slowness in this that caused my mother to rule that dogs must stay out of the house."
Simply picking up the puppy when he pisses (or craps) is sufficient negative reinforcement. When followed with the positive reinforcement at the appropriate piss-site, you get an extremely quick association developed. Much much faster than the old smack-him-and-rub-his-nose-in-it, and with fewer unintended behavioural side-effects.
There's probably a deeper lesson here about juvenile delinquents too. But honestly, you're starting so far behind, let's just stick to puppies for now.
You'd think the death penalty states would create a co-operatively owned production plant to make the small doses required. (And the precursors, and back far enough up the chain to reach raw feed-stocks that aren't at risk of boycotts.) Or failing that, at least one death-penalty state smart enough to create a state-owned plant and sell the anaesthetic to the other death-penalty states at significant profit.
High level opiate doses have wildly different effects on normal people; throw in tolerance effects in junkies and it's even worse. They aren't uniform enough to be defined in legislation and handled by non-medical prison staff. (Anaesthesiologists don't participate in death penalties, I think are forbidden from doing so not just by their oath, but by their licensing board.)
All of the other methods had failure rates high enough to traumatise the people watching. Which is why lethal injection was created.
If it can be proven without a shadow of a doubt that the person accused did the deed,
And given the number of people released from death row after if was proven that they were innocent; and given the even larger number unsafe convictions due to corrupt prosecutors, bad (or excluded) evidence, incompetent/lazy/drunk/senile defenders and judges, and of course kill-all-niggers jurors in death-penalty states; the US justice system clearly fails that measure. So game over? Death penalty fails to pass the first hurdle? Can we stop now?
Your scenario sounds much more like a toxic/knockout gas of some sort than nitrogen, unless people are *really* careless
People have died from this. Not just from nitrogen leaks, but also from metal tanks (or ship's ballasts) rusting enough when water is drained to reduce the oxygen levels in the trapped air. There have apparently been cases of entire work-crews (or families on farms) dying one after another as they attempt to rescue the others. Usually followed by poison-gas panic when the next group of people see the piles of dead bodies.
How exactly would holding your breathe help if the problem is just that you're not getting any more oxygen when you breathe?
When you breath un-oxygenated air, your body removes oxygen from the blood. Hence it takes much less time to pass out (and die) from breathing nitrogen, then from holding your breath.
And oxygen deprivation gives no warnings. (Actually it does, but a symptom is that you aren't aware enough to notice.) Whereas holding your breath gives you a clear sense of how long you've been holding your breath. When you can't take it, you run out of the room into fresh air, ideally while someone else takes over.
It would be better if you had a simple portable oxygen bottle, but beggars choice. Wait for the authorities and the people inside are dead. Risk your life intelligently, and they might be recovered into fresh air before they die.
There was another man who thought like this in history...
Moses? Was it Moses? It was Moses wasn't it?
She was tortured and killed. Those are bad things. Torturing and killing are bad.
Which is why civilised people don't torture and kill.
the one who were trying to protect from unnecessary cruelty and suffering.
Us. The ones we're trying to protect from unnecessary cruelty and suffering is us. That's why people oppose the death penalty, it hurts us; and why advocates keep switching to more "humane" methods as one-by-one the previous ones fail to live up to their promise, and to society's standards.
We used to draw and quarter. "Quarter" is a literal thing, ie, tear into four parts. With horses. And in public, to cheering crowds. Then nooses, to "humanely" strangle them. Then nooses and trap-doors to "humanely" break their necks. Then non-public executions, because we're civilised, see. Then most of us banned it completely, but the US continued trying to find "humane" methods. Cyanide, electrocution, drug cocktails...
Just use normal ventilation. Nitrogen isn't poisonous, it only kills if it displaces enough oxygen. The leak has to completely replace the air in the room (well, more than half anyway.). Unlike, say, carbon monoxide, which only needs to reach 50-100 parts per million or so.
[The industrial danger is when there's gas bottles stored in a sealed room, for example, which is entered after a long period. "Imma get me some gas bottle". Thud. "Ohnoes bob collapse, me go help". Thud. "Ohnoes bill and bob collapse, me go help." Thud. "Ohnoes, everyone collapse, much poison gas, me leave them to die and evacuate building instead of just calling for help and taking turns holding breath to drag them into fresh air..."]
gas chambers of all types are dangerous,
Nitrogen doesn't need a "gas chamber". Just a mask and reservoir bag (aka non-rebreather mask). Cost: $20 for the disposable mask. A few bucks per cubic metre for high-grade nitrogen. (I'd also add a bubbler to remove any odours, and warm and humidify the gas.)
a fixed aim bench rifle of sufficient bore directly to the head
Judging from bolt-guns at slaughterhouses, there's an error rate. And the result of an error is nasty. (Whereas if the nitrogen doesn't work, it just doesn't work.)
This is the problem with all methods of execution. The guillotine sometimes wouldn't cut all the way through. The noose wouldn't break their neck (or the rope would break). The cyanide wouldn't release properly. The electric chair wouldn't make proper contact through the skin, burning them alive instead of instantly electrocuting them. And sometimes the anaesthetic doses for lethal injection go wrong, so the person wakes up as the kill-you-horribly part is injected; or they use the wrong drugs. This the advantage of nitrogen, anything less than a kill is benign.
or we could just make life without parole the top possible penalty and save a ton of money AND make errors more reversible
Or that.
According to Mythbusters, it also increases your tolerance of physical pain.
Whatever Hominins descend from us. Or robots. Probably robots.
for 18th century migrants
for stone-age tribes.
"You just don't get it."
Compare the habitability of Europe with that of Australia for 18th century migrants. And yet, here I am.
Compare the habitability of sub-tropical Africa, with that of Siberia through to northern Canada for stone-age tribes. And yet, fuckin' Eskimos.
Humans are weird.
(People told them not to go, but they listened to Nunavut.)
Cargo also included an ant-farm.
[And "video tapes". Because... the '80s?]
The difference is that they wear the cost of fixing it. Possibly losing the contract entirely.
They don't get more money to fix it, and a continued guaranteed cost-plus supply contract for another 20-plus years.