My car as a nice tight suspension and performance tires. I think the biggest part for me was that there are plenty of other cars on the roads there these days. Not usually enough to cause a traffic jam (say only 25% of the time they wouldn't make way for faster vehicles), but you had to be very aware the whole time that a car may be coming straight at you because they didn't make their turn properly coming the other way. I had to nail the brakes on more than one occasion because someone else whipped around a turn and ended up in my lane going towards me.
I could have more than doubled the speed limits, if I could be confident that the roads were fairly empty and could utilize both lanes.:) Since there are so many blind turns, you pretty much have to stay safely inside your lane, so many racing turns are eliminated. That is, taking turns using the entire lane to straighten out the turn a bit. If I'm on the inside line for a hard right, someone else may be coming the other way and may not quite make their turn perfectly, so we could smack each other just before the apex of the turn. No, I always managed to avoid getting smacked, but some people haven't been so lucky over the years.
I have 275/40ZR17 Sumitomo HTR Z III tires which are rated very high, and perform very well. Even still, with the hard cornering, one run from the SFV to Mt. Wilson, and back, would leave notable wear on the tires.
My car drives like it's on rails. My ex noted that she felt like we were on a train. The body doesn't roll significantly, so what I tell it to do, it responds immediately. Not to say I couldn't have gotten in trouble, I've just driven my car for so many years I know it's limitations, and feel problems before they manifest into real problems (like missing the road or spinning).
They may have upped the speed limits since the 60's to accommodate more "modern cars" that aren't so heavy, and have less body roll.
I used to live out there, and loved the drive to the observatory. Well, it's a treacherous and exhausting drive, but still fun especially if you have a performance car. I used to joke that the speed limits aren't there as a suggestion. They're just about as fast as you can go and survive.:) It's all fun and games until you fall off a cliff, which happens fairly regularly.
From what I recall, they do have provisions to protect the observatory equipment inside the building (like, covering the lenses), so I'd suspect they'll be ok.
For those who haven't been out there, which I would guess would be the majority of readers, the whole area is heavily forested in very steep mountains, so in the dry season, it's easy to presume it could be easily engulfed by the seasonal wildfires. The mountains make it damned near impossible for teams to fight the fires. The idea of "cut a fire break, and send some trucks out to fight it" are out. I have seen the reports of burning the surrounding area to prevent the hot fire from getting too close, and repeated drenching by aircraft, which is their best bet. There is no option of "it won't come here". If the fire gets close enough, it'll be a nightmare to suppress.
Good luck guys, you'll need it. Hopefully I'll get out there again someday, and the facility will still exist.
I found this document on using glass in asphalt (aka glassphalt). It's used in surfaces designed for speeds under 40mph. They mention that if it's used for the upper layer of the roadway, as long as less than 10% of the mix is glass, skidding doesn't become a concern. What was being suggested is closer to 100%.
I believe limestone is used in some roadways. I have seen some roads glitter when the light is right, so I don't know if it's pieces of glass or quartz crystals.
I used to live in an area that used crushed limestone for some rural roads. It could be a trick to drive down them when they were wet. That wasn't the fault of the crystals though, wet limestone gives you no traction. The speed limit on those roads were always 30mph, although that was rarely followed. Of course, with the ignoring of the speed limit, there were frequently cars that needed to be pulled from the side of the roads, where they slid off.
"You gotta know when to hold 'em,
know when to fold 'em.
Know when to walk away,
Know when to run..."
Your points against euthanasia are valid. There are times when they aren't valid. Oh shit, I'm going to die too (eventually), but off-ing myself today isn't the prudent choice. Diagnosed terminally ill, and showing very painful symptoms of it are a completely different story. If you know you've been very sick, in a lot of pain, and you've been diagnosed with not long to live, which will be more painful than any person should have to live through is a very different story.
It's legal and "humane" to do it to pets. Let me share an example. A friend had a pet who was dying. It was sick for several years, and diagnosed as terminally ill. It had lost a lot of weight (like 50% of it's healthy weight), was screaming, convulsing, and unresponsive. The screaming was like nothing I had ever heard, and completely uncharacteristic for this type of animal. It was clearly going to continue in unbearable pain. We sat down and made the decision of what to do. It wasn't my pet, so I was able to be less emotional about it, but my friend was heartbroken. She spoon fed this pet for the last few years, because it was unable (or unwilling) to eat on it's own. We went to the animal hospital who confirmed our opinion. They put it to sleep while she held it. We put it out of it's misery, where we could have let it live its last hours or possibly days in the worst pain possible.
Likewise, when I was a kid, I had an old dog. He was clearly dying. It hurt for him to move, but he managed to do ok going from a chair we had put outside for him, to lay in the sun, and come back. That was his routine for a few years. One day, he was laying in the yard sunning himself normally. A little while later, we came back and he was laying in the same spot, dead.
An uncle of mine passed the same way. He knew he was very ill. He wasn't in so much pain that he couldn't continue. One day, he was sitting, watching TV, and passed away peacefully. My aunt was with him the whole time. As soon as she knew what was happening (because he indicated so) she called the paramedics. They arrived in less than 5 minutes, and he was gone.
People say that pets are lesser creatures, but I completely disagree. After my father died, we had three older pets die within a month. I believe they were upset by his passing, and had simply given up the will to live. I've heard of the same happening with elderly people. When an old person loses a spouse, sometimes they follow shortly after from the grief.
I don't like death. I swore quite a while ago that I wouldn't even be attending my own funeral. Unfortunately, it is a fact of life, and we will all have to deal with it eventually. How we play the hand is our own choice.
I read your post. I'm sorry. Ok, that's a completely worthless thing to say, but we all do it anyways. How about, thanks for sympathizing with me, at least we know there are a few people in the world who have gone through what we have. I don't wish it on anyone else.
I saw an article about that for here in the states. They said the average train engineer (the guy driving, not designing the train) experiences 3 suicides in his career. Human vs train never turns out well for the human. They had some interesting quotes. One was talking about how he continued to drive the same route, and every time he passed the place where he had hit a suicidal person, it bothered him severely. I'd hate to be him. When my step-son died, going into his room generally broke us all down to tears. After he died, it was still his room. We didn't change it, other than straightening up a little, which we did sometimes anyways. His laundry was all done and put away. His computer stayed on, but we left a memorial video playing in a loop on it. That was a room we didn't have to go into. How hard would it be to have to drive past the same spot the same that someone walked in front of him, and have to wonder if it's going to happen every time you pass there.
Nah, AC posting is usually reserved for trolls.:) I love seeing good insightful posts from AC's, but they're so rare that it's a surprise. I know, sometimes people don't have accounts to post with, but really the AC at the top of the message usually means there's a troll following.
I agree, the blood splatter mess isn't exactly the legacy I'd want to leave behind. I've spent my life making sure I'm well preserved, between bad food with lots of preservatives, and generally pickling myself with alcohol. Archeologists in 1000 years will dig up my body, and I'll look as fresh as when they planted me, even without embalming. I'll leave a lovely, yet well worn corpse.:) My friends will say "yes, he lived his life to the fullest, and was happy." Well hell, who knows what they'll really say. There may only be one person show up to say "finally that bastard is gone."
But hey, he was picking his exit, and that's how he wanted it. I hope he laid down plenty of plastic so he didn't leave a mess for the family and friends to clean up. When it all comes down to it, we all pick our way out. Some people go the "legal" and "moral" way, and die slowly and painfully in hospice. Some take a more express method. As with life, to each his own.
I guess it's better than slitting your wrists or hanging yourself in a hotel, for housekeeping to find sometime the next day (or days later).
A friend of mine went through that too. Her father died of terminal cancer. They did a lot to him, and gave him lots of drugs to help the pain, but he wasted away until his last day came. Needless to say, it was a terrible experience for her. It's something I don't ever wish on anyone.
You shouldn't have posted A/C. You're very much right.
I saw my dad dying. It wasn't pretty. My last memories of him are in the hospital bed, which I'm sure wasn't the way he wanted to be seen going out. He was military also, but he wouldn't have chosen the gun to the head route. He fought to the end, in disbelief that he could be dying. Unfortunately, there was a burial, and now a gravestone to prove it. His mantra was "it's indigestion", when in reality it was heart attacks, which took their toll. He was smart, and he knew the truth, but sometimes we'll ignore the simple truth when it's bad enough.
If he could have taken his last day on his terms (but not quite so messy), he may have taken that route. But I'm pretty sure he wouldn't have, simply because he refused to believe it. At very least, he could have saved himself the last day of suffering.
My step son was almost luckier. He died quickly in the comfort of our home by natural causes (a seizure). He had already told us, he had no recollection of anything that happened during his seizures, so he was completely unaware of what happened. His mother and I were the first to find him, and despite the obvious truth, I performed CPR until the paramedics arrived. He was already rigor, but I refused to believe it. I did tell the 911 operator "he's rigor-like". Not rigor mortis. I refused to believe the truth, even though I knew better. The paramedics were kind when they showed up, but there was nothing for them to do but talk us through it.
Damn. I was having a good night. Now I'm stuck with the memories of what happened again. They never do go away, but sometimes they can be sidetracked with better memories of the people we loved.
You know, when I go, I want it on my own terms too. Shotgun to the head? That wouldn't exactly be my choice. I'm thinking of a nice IV morphine cocktail, heavy on the morphine. Quick, painless, and you're gone. Not that I'm thinking of an out, but sometimes you consider what the options are. I could live painfully in hospice care for weeks or months, or go to sleep and never wake up. If/when the day comes, I hope a doctor will be kind enough to to leave it by my bedside and walk away for 20 minutes with the EKG turned off. I've seen the way it can go. I'd prefer not to go that way.
It's a shame that "assisted euthanasia" is not an option in most places. We can put down our pets so they don't suffer, but we don't allow the same humane treatment for ourselves.
Well, if you saw my resume, or knew the work I've done, you'd know better. Hell, if you've kept up with my journal on here, you'd have a hint. Not that I have anything to prove, but I've been in and out of;arge DC's for over 10 years. I've been in enough Equinix facilities where I'd forget which one I was in at any given point, and would get lost inside. Well, it's easy enough to get lost in them, it's not like they keep a logical floor plan on any of them. I've also been hosted in Switch&Data, Level3, Qwest, AT&T, and worked in small ones where I didn't even care to remember who they were.
The "may I move you" was a partner company's database server. The guy in charge was bent on staying on that machine. It wasn't the best business choice to stay on that machine, so the "may I move you" was the polite way to begin. It's a good way to start a holy war with management if you say "I am moving you", even though it's their purchased equipment. It's also a good way to go from a senior position to unemployed by morning. In the end, they did purchase an almost identical machine to the DB server that I moved them to, so the new machine was their purchased hardware. Since the old machine was so big, and archaic, they didn't want it shipped back to their office, so it was stuck at mine.
While I do agree, I've been considering replacing my desktop (and adding a second one), when money allows. CompUSA is still alive in my city, so I wander the isles when I'm there. I can get a $300 machine that's faster than any of my old desktops. Ok, so it's an eMachines, big deal. I bought one about 2 years ago to be a mail filter server. It was an AMD64 with 1Gb RAM. I upgraded the RAM immediately (we needed more for the mail load). The motherboard died, so I picked up an Asus board for about $50. So, it's a crappy $300 eMachines computer, but now there's nothing crappy about it except the name on the case.:)
I won't argue the memory probably helped with the overall speed, just as better drives did, but all in all I'd say it was the CPU speed. The faster memory and better drives are an added bonus.:)
It was really hard to get him to step away from that old server, since there was such an investment made in it. In the end, after we decided not to put that server back into production for that purpose, I couldn't convince anyone to use it. I don't know it's final fate, but I did suggest that it would make very nice boat anchor.:) It took two of us to even consider racking it, even though I did manage to move it once by myself (and suffered the pain after). I figured if they ever used it as an anchor, the best option would be to cut the line when they wanted to move again.
The damned thing was huge, noisy, hot, and slower than even the desktops we were buying at the time. I suggested using it as a file server, since it had a decent sized raid on it, but it made the relatively quiet server room rather loud. It was fun annoying people by turning it on in my office. You could hear it running two offices over.:)
I had this argument with someone once. They didn't quite get it. The machine they were using was a 4 CPU 700Mhz server. In their logic, 700Mhz * 4 = 2.8Ghz. I wanted to move them to a 2 CPU 1.4Ghz machine, which I promised would be blazing fast. In their mind 1.4Ghz * 2 = 2.8Ghz, so there was no difference.
There were a bunch of reasons for the move. The hardware was old. The form was huge (like 5u tall) and power hungry. The OS needed to be updated badly, and we couldn't take it offline for a day to do that. One day there was a fault of some kind (it's been a while, I don't remember specifically), so we moved it over to the new machine that I had wanted to move them to. They were amazed. Their $40,000 server had been replaced by a $2,000 server (original costs for both), and it was running faster and better than before. After the move, I repaired their old server, upgraded the OS, and made it ready. I offered to move them back, and they refused.:)
About a year later, we had a 2CPU 2.4Ghz machine ready for them, and I offered again, "May I move you?" This time there wasn't a complaint. We just scheduled a window and did it. I set a 3 hour window, and we had it completed in about 15 minutes.
I agree, I'd rather have CPU speed AND cores. I'd sacrifice extra cores for more speed. CPU speed has stagnated, while they're growing cores. I remember this happening in the past too, around the time CPU's were 200Mhz. You could get motherboards that supported one CPU, then 2 CPU, then 4 CPU, but the speeds weren't going up. You could give me 100 CPU's at 200Mhz, but I'd rather have one at 10Ghz.
I'm sure people will throw a bunch of excuses of why. I remember back when the 50Mhz CPU was the fastest available, there were all kinds of reasons thrown around of why CPU's would "never be faster". People were very insistent that they were right. There were RF interference issues. If CPU's got to RF speeds, radio and TV would cease to work. If we got up near 2.4Ghz, people would be cooked because it's the same frequency as microwave ovens. There was no way to deal with the thermal issues, and computers would be ovens requiring liquid cooling (like liquid nitrogen or helium, not water cooling). Blah, blah, blah, blah. As we've seen, we did get well beyond 50Mhz. It's just a matter of time. I'm just disappointed that we end up stagnating. It's probably financial issues. The market will support a slower multicore CPU, but people won't spend the money on faster CPU's right now.
I always love the "latest greatest" craze. It's entertaining. People will spend mad money on latest greatest, and I'll wait 6 months or a year to buy the same thing at a fraction of the cost. Maybe I'm part of the problem there. I won't drop $500 on a CPU, but I'll drop $100 on last years model that's only slightly slower.
At least right now it's nice, since I can buy older and older hardware, and really not be far behind the curve.:)
A cut tree is still a cut tree, regardless of where it was. At least tree farms generally replant new trees.
When I was a kid, we planted acres of trees. It was beautiful taking a lonely pasture and making a forest out of it.
I looked at Google Maps, and from the satellite view, it was still a forest. They recently did a street view, and it's all gone, except for a few odd trees that were not part of our planting. That land will probably be filled with condos in the next 10 years.
I love this in FPS games. I watch people rush into situations, and make a ranged weapon fight a close combat fight. I'll play the same game, and clear an area from a distance.
I play flight sims the same way. Clear out the targets before I get anywhere close. When I get to an area, it's no longer a who can hit who first with guns, it's a battle of what crippled aircraft to I need to clean up.
Movies and TV make close combat look cool, because it's more dramatic. The drama of entertainment isn't always the way it really is in real life. How exciting would it be to launch what appears to be a blind shot, and 30 seconds later the enemy drops off the radar.
I have to wonder what the effects on the dramatic maneuvers indicated in the story would be. Aircraft are kinda dependent on laminar airflow. Stalling an aircraft, regardless of how much thrust you have to resume flight, is still a bad idea except at an air show. Well, even then it's dangerous, but it entertains the crowds. How hard would it be on a pilot, if the directed thrust spun it 180 degrees on any axis. Too many G's can leave a pilot blacked out. It's kinda hard to fly when you're out cold. I'd hate to think what the flipping motions would do as far as motion of the pilot too. It could bring a whole new meaning to whiplash.
But, those were for scientific purposes. You were observing the expansion of gasses into a flexible container. You observed when a compressed gas is released rapidly, it causes dramatic cooling of the container. You observed the freezing effects will burn your skin. You also observed the anesthetic effects of inhalation of a readily available product when applied in off-label uses.
If you should apologize for anything, it would be for using your parents money to pay for your tuition and living expenses; to the planet for the trees that were used in the production of your books; and the massive amounts of energy wasted in keeping the universities running.:) This NOS you released is trivial in comparison to the cars, buses, or whatever internal combustion vehicle you may have used to get to school and travel while you were there.
Unfortunately, cherry picking facts will prove almost anything. Statistical information is a wonderful use of it. I'd cite references, but 98% of all statistics are made up, including this one.:)
My grandfather died peacefully in his sleep. Much unlike the passengers in his car who were screaming the whole time.:)
But if grandpa needs NOS to do 120, he needed a better car. It must be a bit late to review his other options. I was watching crash test videos of the "G-Whiz" electric car. I don't think there's a better suicide machine on the road. Even a 40mph front end impact is sure to be fatal.
A little something like this. It looked like a very practical experiment.:) I saw some of the others with that car, and none looked particularly survivable. I guess a 2mph impact with say a squirrel may be ok. Well, not for the squirrel, but
That's an interesting idea. That would allow for better alignments of the panels (adjustment for southern view), and protect the roads. I'd have to wonder what effect covered roads would have in most areas though. It would reduce light on the roads, almost mandating running headlights all the time, and weather does help keep roads clean (ran washing loose debris like sand away).
There are some roads that I drive that are partially covered by a parallel overpass. It's wonderful to drive in the shade but it's usefulness for blocking the glare depends on which way the road goes. For example, it's great heading East an hour or so after sunrise, but when it turns Southeast, that benefit is lost.
There may be large practical concerns, like height and wind resistance. While we love to believe high winds are a hurricane related event, they hit every part of the country at some point in hurricanes, summer thunderstorms in the SE, Noreasters, tornados, Santa Ana winds, etc, etc, etc.... I've seen a few bridges damaged from overheight trucks. One was an unexpected event, where the raising valve on a dump truck failed, so the back raised itself while traveling, and hit an overpass. The driver had no clue until his truck suddenly stopped. That would go from a sudden stopping event, to a potentially catastrophic event with the truck now electrified.
Well, as a matter of fact, I have driven on just about ever surface that's used on roads in America. I haven't found one yet that is made of glass.
I've driven on wet asphalt and concrete during hurricanes in Florida. I've driven on roads through the hottest parts of America (Texas, Arizona, New Mexico) both when dry and during flash floods. I've driven in the Northeast US in both good and blizzard conditions. I even had the opportunity to go skiing in a SUV in Alaska (stop? we can't stop).
Everywhere gets some rain at some point. Roads with glass surfaces will be a hazard regardless of where they put them.
And yes, asphalt does give under a truck. It gives much better than what glass would do. Instead of grooved lanes, you'd end up with shattered glass roads. That's far from ideal in anyone's book.
I was going to say, how many accidents would this cause?? If you made the surface with a friction, it would reduce it's ability to absorb light. If you avoided that, you'd have cars that are unstable. I get nervous crossing metal grated bridges. My car sways as it grabs traction on the not quite straight lines in the road. What's going to happen when it becomes impossible to stop, accelerate, or turn (lane change). It's a pending disaster. A little rain, and it's a disaster for safe driving. I will admit, I've done emergency lane changes, because someone did something stupid in front of me. With this plan, emergency lane changes would become impossible, right along with braking.
I'm sure they tested with cars. What happens when you constantly run one over with fully loaded 53' trailers? It's obvious where trucks frequent an area, the ditches created by their weight, even in asphault, would destroy the panels.
But hey, not my idea, and I'm not responsible for the liability involved. We'd be better off using the right of ways (that pesky grassy area on either side of the road) for solar, and they'd be able to track the sun for improved light absorption.
Slashdot Mirror
My car as a nice tight suspension and performance tires. I think the biggest part for me was that there are plenty of other cars on the roads there these days. Not usually enough to cause a traffic jam (say only 25% of the time they wouldn't make way for faster vehicles), but you had to be very aware the whole time that a car may be coming straight at you because they didn't make their turn properly coming the other way. I had to nail the brakes on more than one occasion because someone else whipped around a turn and ended up in my lane going towards me.
I could have more than doubled the speed limits, if I could be confident that the roads were fairly empty and could utilize both lanes. :) Since there are so many blind turns, you pretty much have to stay safely inside your lane, so many racing turns are eliminated. That is, taking turns using the entire lane to straighten out the turn a bit. If I'm on the inside line for a hard right, someone else may be coming the other way and may not quite make their turn perfectly, so we could smack each other just before the apex of the turn. No, I always managed to avoid getting smacked, but some people haven't been so lucky over the years.
I have 275/40ZR17 Sumitomo HTR Z III tires which are rated very high, and perform very well. Even still, with the hard cornering, one run from the SFV to Mt. Wilson, and back, would leave notable wear on the tires.
My car drives like it's on rails. My ex noted that she felt like we were on a train. The body doesn't roll significantly, so what I tell it to do, it responds immediately. Not to say I couldn't have gotten in trouble, I've just driven my car for so many years I know it's limitations, and feel problems before they manifest into real problems (like missing the road or spinning).
They may have upped the speed limits since the 60's to accommodate more "modern cars" that aren't so heavy, and have less body roll.
I used to live out there, and loved the drive to the observatory. Well, it's a treacherous and exhausting drive, but still fun especially if you have a performance car. I used to joke that the speed limits aren't there as a suggestion. They're just about as fast as you can go and survive. :) It's all fun and games until you fall off a cliff, which happens fairly regularly.
From what I recall, they do have provisions to protect the observatory equipment inside the building (like, covering the lenses), so I'd suspect they'll be ok.
For those who haven't been out there, which I would guess would be the majority of readers, the whole area is heavily forested in very steep mountains, so in the dry season, it's easy to presume it could be easily engulfed by the seasonal wildfires. The mountains make it damned near impossible for teams to fight the fires. The idea of "cut a fire break, and send some trucks out to fight it" are out. I have seen the reports of burning the surrounding area to prevent the hot fire from getting too close, and repeated drenching by aircraft, which is their best bet. There is no option of "it won't come here". If the fire gets close enough, it'll be a nightmare to suppress.
Good luck guys, you'll need it. Hopefully I'll get out there again someday, and the facility will still exist.
I found this document on using glass in asphalt (aka glassphalt). It's used in surfaces designed for speeds under 40mph. They mention that if it's used for the upper layer of the roadway, as long as less than 10% of the mix is glass, skidding doesn't become a concern. What was being suggested is closer to 100%.
I believe limestone is used in some roadways. I have seen some roads glitter when the light is right, so I don't know if it's pieces of glass or quartz crystals.
I used to live in an area that used crushed limestone for some rural roads. It could be a trick to drive down them when they were wet. That wasn't the fault of the crystals though, wet limestone gives you no traction. The speed limit on those roads were always 30mph, although that was rarely followed. Of course, with the ignoring of the speed limit, there were frequently cars that needed to be pulled from the side of the roads, where they slid off.
In the words of a famous man,
"You gotta know when to hold 'em,
know when to fold 'em.
Know when to walk away,
Know when to run..."
Your points against euthanasia are valid. There are times when they aren't valid. Oh shit, I'm going to die too (eventually), but off-ing myself today isn't the prudent choice. Diagnosed terminally ill, and showing very painful symptoms of it are a completely different story. If you know you've been very sick, in a lot of pain, and you've been diagnosed with not long to live, which will be more painful than any person should have to live through is a very different story.
It's legal and "humane" to do it to pets. Let me share an example. A friend had a pet who was dying. It was sick for several years, and diagnosed as terminally ill. It had lost a lot of weight (like 50% of it's healthy weight), was screaming, convulsing, and unresponsive. The screaming was like nothing I had ever heard, and completely uncharacteristic for this type of animal. It was clearly going to continue in unbearable pain. We sat down and made the decision of what to do. It wasn't my pet, so I was able to be less emotional about it, but my friend was heartbroken. She spoon fed this pet for the last few years, because it was unable (or unwilling) to eat on it's own. We went to the animal hospital who confirmed our opinion. They put it to sleep while she held it. We put it out of it's misery, where we could have let it live its last hours or possibly days in the worst pain possible.
Likewise, when I was a kid, I had an old dog. He was clearly dying. It hurt for him to move, but he managed to do ok going from a chair we had put outside for him, to lay in the sun, and come back. That was his routine for a few years. One day, he was laying in the yard sunning himself normally. A little while later, we came back and he was laying in the same spot, dead.
An uncle of mine passed the same way. He knew he was very ill. He wasn't in so much pain that he couldn't continue. One day, he was sitting, watching TV, and passed away peacefully. My aunt was with him the whole time. As soon as she knew what was happening (because he indicated so) she called the paramedics. They arrived in less than 5 minutes, and he was gone.
People say that pets are lesser creatures, but I completely disagree. After my father died, we had three older pets die within a month. I believe they were upset by his passing, and had simply given up the will to live. I've heard of the same happening with elderly people. When an old person loses a spouse, sometimes they follow shortly after from the grief.
I don't like death. I swore quite a while ago that I wouldn't even be attending my own funeral. Unfortunately, it is a fact of life, and we will all have to deal with it eventually. How we play the hand is our own choice.
I read your post. I'm sorry. Ok, that's a completely worthless thing to say, but we all do it anyways. How about, thanks for sympathizing with me, at least we know there are a few people in the world who have gone through what we have. I don't wish it on anyone else.
I saw an article about that for here in the states. They said the average train engineer (the guy driving, not designing the train) experiences 3 suicides in his career. Human vs train never turns out well for the human. They had some interesting quotes. One was talking about how he continued to drive the same route, and every time he passed the place where he had hit a suicidal person, it bothered him severely. I'd hate to be him. When my step-son died, going into his room generally broke us all down to tears. After he died, it was still his room. We didn't change it, other than straightening up a little, which we did sometimes anyways. His laundry was all done and put away. His computer stayed on, but we left a memorial video playing in a loop on it. That was a room we didn't have to go into. How hard would it be to have to drive past the same spot the same that someone walked in front of him, and have to wonder if it's going to happen every time you pass there.
Nah, AC posting is usually reserved for trolls. :) I love seeing good insightful posts from AC's, but they're so rare that it's a surprise. I know, sometimes people don't have accounts to post with, but really the AC at the top of the message usually means there's a troll following.
To each his own, right?
I agree, the blood splatter mess isn't exactly the legacy I'd want to leave behind. I've spent my life making sure I'm well preserved, between bad food with lots of preservatives, and generally pickling myself with alcohol. Archeologists in 1000 years will dig up my body, and I'll look as fresh as when they planted me, even without embalming. I'll leave a lovely, yet well worn corpse. :) My friends will say "yes, he lived his life to the fullest, and was happy." Well hell, who knows what they'll really say. There may only be one person show up to say "finally that bastard is gone."
But hey, he was picking his exit, and that's how he wanted it. I hope he laid down plenty of plastic so he didn't leave a mess for the family and friends to clean up. When it all comes down to it, we all pick our way out. Some people go the "legal" and "moral" way, and die slowly and painfully in hospice. Some take a more express method. As with life, to each his own.
I guess it's better than slitting your wrists or hanging yourself in a hotel, for housekeeping to find sometime the next day (or days later).
A friend of mine went through that too. Her father died of terminal cancer. They did a lot to him, and gave him lots of drugs to help the pain, but he wasted away until his last day came. Needless to say, it was a terrible experience for her. It's something I don't ever wish on anyone.
You shouldn't have posted A/C. You're very much right.
I saw my dad dying. It wasn't pretty. My last memories of him are in the hospital bed, which I'm sure wasn't the way he wanted to be seen going out. He was military also, but he wouldn't have chosen the gun to the head route. He fought to the end, in disbelief that he could be dying. Unfortunately, there was a burial, and now a gravestone to prove it. His mantra was "it's indigestion", when in reality it was heart attacks, which took their toll. He was smart, and he knew the truth, but sometimes we'll ignore the simple truth when it's bad enough.
If he could have taken his last day on his terms (but not quite so messy), he may have taken that route. But I'm pretty sure he wouldn't have, simply because he refused to believe it. At very least, he could have saved himself the last day of suffering.
My step son was almost luckier. He died quickly in the comfort of our home by natural causes (a seizure). He had already told us, he had no recollection of anything that happened during his seizures, so he was completely unaware of what happened. His mother and I were the first to find him, and despite the obvious truth, I performed CPR until the paramedics arrived. He was already rigor, but I refused to believe it. I did tell the 911 operator "he's rigor-like". Not rigor mortis. I refused to believe the truth, even though I knew better. The paramedics were kind when they showed up, but there was nothing for them to do but talk us through it.
Damn. I was having a good night. Now I'm stuck with the memories of what happened again. They never do go away, but sometimes they can be sidetracked with better memories of the people we loved.
You know, when I go, I want it on my own terms too. Shotgun to the head? That wouldn't exactly be my choice. I'm thinking of a nice IV morphine cocktail, heavy on the morphine. Quick, painless, and you're gone. Not that I'm thinking of an out, but sometimes you consider what the options are. I could live painfully in hospice care for weeks or months, or go to sleep and never wake up. If/when the day comes, I hope a doctor will be kind enough to to leave it by my bedside and walk away for 20 minutes with the EKG turned off. I've seen the way it can go. I'd prefer not to go that way.
It's a shame that "assisted euthanasia" is not an option in most places. We can put down our pets so they don't suffer, but we don't allow the same humane treatment for ourselves.
Well, if you saw my resume, or knew the work I've done, you'd know better. Hell, if you've kept up with my journal on here, you'd have a hint. Not that I have anything to prove, but I've been in and out of ;arge DC's for over 10 years. I've been in enough Equinix facilities where I'd forget which one I was in at any given point, and would get lost inside. Well, it's easy enough to get lost in them, it's not like they keep a logical floor plan on any of them. I've also been hosted in Switch&Data, Level3, Qwest, AT&T, and worked in small ones where I didn't even care to remember who they were.
The "may I move you" was a partner company's database server. The guy in charge was bent on staying on that machine. It wasn't the best business choice to stay on that machine, so the "may I move you" was the polite way to begin. It's a good way to start a holy war with management if you say "I am moving you", even though it's their purchased equipment. It's also a good way to go from a senior position to unemployed by morning. In the end, they did purchase an almost identical machine to the DB server that I moved them to, so the new machine was their purchased hardware. Since the old machine was so big, and archaic, they didn't want it shipped back to their office, so it was stuck at mine.
While I do agree, I've been considering replacing my desktop (and adding a second one), when money allows. CompUSA is still alive in my city, so I wander the isles when I'm there. I can get a $300 machine that's faster than any of my old desktops. Ok, so it's an eMachines, big deal. I bought one about 2 years ago to be a mail filter server. It was an AMD64 with 1Gb RAM. I upgraded the RAM immediately (we needed more for the mail load). The motherboard died, so I picked up an Asus board for about $50. So, it's a crappy $300 eMachines computer, but now there's nothing crappy about it except the name on the case. :)
I won't argue the memory probably helped with the overall speed, just as better drives did, but all in all I'd say it was the CPU speed. The faster memory and better drives are an added bonus. :)
It was really hard to get him to step away from that old server, since there was such an investment made in it. In the end, after we decided not to put that server back into production for that purpose, I couldn't convince anyone to use it. I don't know it's final fate, but I did suggest that it would make very nice boat anchor. :) It took two of us to even consider racking it, even though I did manage to move it once by myself (and suffered the pain after). I figured if they ever used it as an anchor, the best option would be to cut the line when they wanted to move again.
The damned thing was huge, noisy, hot, and slower than even the desktops we were buying at the time. I suggested using it as a file server, since it had a decent sized raid on it, but it made the relatively quiet server room rather loud. It was fun annoying people by turning it on in my office. You could hear it running two offices over. :)
I had this argument with someone once. They didn't quite get it. The machine they were using was a 4 CPU 700Mhz server. In their logic, 700Mhz * 4 = 2.8Ghz. I wanted to move them to a 2 CPU 1.4Ghz machine, which I promised would be blazing fast. In their mind 1.4Ghz * 2 = 2.8Ghz, so there was no difference.
There were a bunch of reasons for the move. The hardware was old. The form was huge (like 5u tall) and power hungry. The OS needed to be updated badly, and we couldn't take it offline for a day to do that. One day there was a fault of some kind (it's been a while, I don't remember specifically), so we moved it over to the new machine that I had wanted to move them to. They were amazed. Their $40,000 server had been replaced by a $2,000 server (original costs for both), and it was running faster and better than before. After the move, I repaired their old server, upgraded the OS, and made it ready. I offered to move them back, and they refused. :)
About a year later, we had a 2CPU 2.4Ghz machine ready for them, and I offered again, "May I move you?" This time there wasn't a complaint. We just scheduled a window and did it. I set a 3 hour window, and we had it completed in about 15 minutes.
I agree, I'd rather have CPU speed AND cores. I'd sacrifice extra cores for more speed. CPU speed has stagnated, while they're growing cores. I remember this happening in the past too, around the time CPU's were 200Mhz. You could get motherboards that supported one CPU, then 2 CPU, then 4 CPU, but the speeds weren't going up. You could give me 100 CPU's at 200Mhz, but I'd rather have one at 10Ghz.
I'm sure people will throw a bunch of excuses of why. I remember back when the 50Mhz CPU was the fastest available, there were all kinds of reasons thrown around of why CPU's would "never be faster". People were very insistent that they were right. There were RF interference issues. If CPU's got to RF speeds, radio and TV would cease to work. If we got up near 2.4Ghz, people would be cooked because it's the same frequency as microwave ovens. There was no way to deal with the thermal issues, and computers would be ovens requiring liquid cooling (like liquid nitrogen or helium, not water cooling). Blah, blah, blah, blah. As we've seen, we did get well beyond 50Mhz. It's just a matter of time. I'm just disappointed that we end up stagnating. It's probably financial issues. The market will support a slower multicore CPU, but people won't spend the money on faster CPU's right now.
I always love the "latest greatest" craze. It's entertaining. People will spend mad money on latest greatest, and I'll wait 6 months or a year to buy the same thing at a fraction of the cost. Maybe I'm part of the problem there. I won't drop $500 on a CPU, but I'll drop $100 on last years model that's only slightly slower.
At least right now it's nice, since I can buy older and older hardware, and really not be far behind the curve. :)
5th core
A cut tree is still a cut tree, regardless of where it was. At least tree farms generally replant new trees.
When I was a kid, we planted acres of trees. It was beautiful taking a lonely pasture and making a forest out of it.
I looked at Google Maps, and from the satellite view, it was still a forest. They recently did a street view, and it's all gone, except for a few odd trees that were not part of our planting. That land will probably be filled with condos in the next 10 years.
Satellite View
Street View
Just because it was a legitimate lumber company doesn't mean that the deforestation will be replanted any time soon.
I love this in FPS games. I watch people rush into situations, and make a ranged weapon fight a close combat fight. I'll play the same game, and clear an area from a distance.
I play flight sims the same way. Clear out the targets before I get anywhere close. When I get to an area, it's no longer a who can hit who first with guns, it's a battle of what crippled aircraft to I need to clean up.
Movies and TV make close combat look cool, because it's more dramatic. The drama of entertainment isn't always the way it really is in real life. How exciting would it be to launch what appears to be a blind shot, and 30 seconds later the enemy drops off the radar.
I have to wonder what the effects on the dramatic maneuvers indicated in the story would be. Aircraft are kinda dependent on laminar airflow. Stalling an aircraft, regardless of how much thrust you have to resume flight, is still a bad idea except at an air show. Well, even then it's dangerous, but it entertains the crowds. How hard would it be on a pilot, if the directed thrust spun it 180 degrees on any axis. Too many G's can leave a pilot blacked out. It's kinda hard to fly when you're out cold. I'd hate to think what the flipping motions would do as far as motion of the pilot too. It could bring a whole new meaning to whiplash.
But, those were for scientific purposes. You were observing the expansion of gasses into a flexible container. You observed when a compressed gas is released rapidly, it causes dramatic cooling of the container. You observed the freezing effects will burn your skin. You also observed the anesthetic effects of inhalation of a readily available product when applied in off-label uses.
If you should apologize for anything, it would be for using your parents money to pay for your tuition and living expenses; to the planet for the trees that were used in the production of your books; and the massive amounts of energy wasted in keeping the universities running. :) This NOS you released is trivial in comparison to the cars, buses, or whatever internal combustion vehicle you may have used to get to school and travel while you were there.
Homer is amazingly wise. Mmmmmm... doughnuts...
Unfortunately, cherry picking facts will prove almost anything. Statistical information is a wonderful use of it. I'd cite references, but 98% of all statistics are made up, including this one. :)
I think that gets tied to the old joke.....
My grandfather died peacefully in his sleep. Much unlike the passengers in his car who were screaming the whole time. :)
But if grandpa needs NOS to do 120, he needed a better car. It must be a bit late to review his other options. I was watching crash test videos of the "G-Whiz" electric car. I don't think there's a better suicide machine on the road. Even a 40mph front end impact is sure to be fatal.
A little something like this. It looked like a very practical experiment. :) I saw some of the others with that car, and none looked particularly survivable. I guess a 2mph impact with say a squirrel may be ok. Well, not for the squirrel, but
That's an interesting idea. That would allow for better alignments of the panels (adjustment for southern view), and protect the roads. I'd have to wonder what effect covered roads would have in most areas though. It would reduce light on the roads, almost mandating running headlights all the time, and weather does help keep roads clean (ran washing loose debris like sand away).
There are some roads that I drive that are partially covered by a parallel overpass. It's wonderful to drive in the shade but it's usefulness for blocking the glare depends on which way the road goes. For example, it's great heading East an hour or so after sunrise, but when it turns Southeast, that benefit is lost.
There may be large practical concerns, like height and wind resistance. While we love to believe high winds are a hurricane related event, they hit every part of the country at some point in hurricanes, summer thunderstorms in the SE, Noreasters, tornados, Santa Ana winds, etc, etc, etc.... I've seen a few bridges damaged from overheight trucks. One was an unexpected event, where the raising valve on a dump truck failed, so the back raised itself while traveling, and hit an overpass. The driver had no clue until his truck suddenly stopped. That would go from a sudden stopping event, to a potentially catastrophic event with the truck now electrified.
Well, as a matter of fact, I have driven on just about ever surface that's used on roads in America. I haven't found one yet that is made of glass.
I've driven on wet asphalt and concrete during hurricanes in Florida. I've driven on roads through the hottest parts of America (Texas, Arizona, New Mexico) both when dry and during flash floods. I've driven in the Northeast US in both good and blizzard conditions. I even had the opportunity to go skiing in a SUV in Alaska (stop? we can't stop).
Everywhere gets some rain at some point. Roads with glass surfaces will be a hazard regardless of where they put them.
And yes, asphalt does give under a truck. It gives much better than what glass would do. Instead of grooved lanes, you'd end up with shattered glass roads. That's far from ideal in anyone's book.
I was going to say, how many accidents would this cause?? If you made the surface with a friction, it would reduce it's ability to absorb light. If you avoided that, you'd have cars that are unstable. I get nervous crossing metal grated bridges. My car sways as it grabs traction on the not quite straight lines in the road. What's going to happen when it becomes impossible to stop, accelerate, or turn (lane change). It's a pending disaster. A little rain, and it's a disaster for safe driving. I will admit, I've done emergency lane changes, because someone did something stupid in front of me. With this plan, emergency lane changes would become impossible, right along with braking.
I'm sure they tested with cars. What happens when you constantly run one over with fully loaded 53' trailers? It's obvious where trucks frequent an area, the ditches created by their weight, even in asphault, would destroy the panels.
But hey, not my idea, and I'm not responsible for the liability involved. We'd be better off using the right of ways (that pesky grassy area on either side of the road) for solar, and they'd be able to track the sun for improved light absorption.