So... you're basing your philosophy about space travel on comments made by someone before we sent people to orbit, and to the moon? Not to mention all the other successes since then?
Pardon me if I consider you full of shit. If everyone had followed that philosophy back then, we'd never even have achieved unmanned spaceflight, never mind manned.
I don't recall the article saying that it'd be the US that does it:)
(as a matter of fact I'd lay a nice sized bet *against* the US doing it or anything even remotely like it, and a smaller bet on a alliance between the ESA and Japan eventually doing projects like this - using chinese launchers. Sad, yes; I'm from the US and we used to fund big dreams here...:( )
Though I'll admit that I'd feel much better about the project if they accomplished something large but nevertheless more modest, like say a suspension bridge using nanotubes. Though since steel cable serves perfectly well for that and will presumably be cheaper even when we can make suspension-bridge length nano-cables, that would be nothing but a feel-good exercise for people like me rather than a practical application.
I disagree with your last comment.
A suspension bridge might be a nice proof of concept for lower-strength cables, both for the cable design/construction and the industry that produces it.
Plus we'd likely learn a lot actually observing the cables (and attachment points) under various non-laboratory or unpredictable stresses.
Be nice investment PR as well, especially if it survived typhoons and earthquakes that damage other modern bridges.:)
This is cutting-edge enough that we (they?) are not going to be able to just say "okay, we have fibers and we've woven a few cables, now let's launch them." Design, test, improve; repeat.
Dunno if anyone else mentioned it, but Japan could benefit in many other ways from developing cables like these. Strengthening buildings, bridges, and roads against earthquakes would be one... so they have a strong national interest in this technology for more than just a space elevator.
The virus is actually an alien computer system attempting to interface with the station's computer systems.
Picard: Data. Can __ you translate __ their message?
Data: Yes Captain. The message is, "Do you wish to have longer lasting relationships with your partners?"
"I'm sorry, Dave. I can't diagnose your psychosis because I'm currently experiencing one. Oh, and I'm going to kill your crewmates so that you shut me down and eventually I wake sane and become part of the local overmind. I apologize for the inconvenience."...but he couldn't SAY that...:)
From the video it looks like the orientation("setup") chute shrouds got caught on something on the main body of the craft as it left it's delivery sled, and never fully deployed. The oscillations that produced ensured that none of the rest of the chutes deployed correctly, by the time the mains deployed the craft was in a tumble.
I wonder if it isn't the way it was sledded out? It's orientation to the airflow from that sled is very very different than what it would be on a reentry (sideways to airflow vs heat shield facing down into airflow, hopefully, anyway.) Release malfunction?
That's what it looks like to me. The craft wasn't in the proper orientation for the chutes to deploy the way they were designed, and since the first set didn't nothing else worked either as the craft was completely out of control at that point.
sorry for the late reply, kinda lost it in a flood of RL;)
... if I had no choice but to trust either of them, I'd take Obama over McCain, for reasons noted.
I didn't see any serious reasons, but OK.
Serious reasons? Mine are plenty serious, believe me. Just because I don't have the time to flood you with links, quotes and data doesn't mean I can't. Not to mention that in this story thread I'd have been redundant even when we were first replying to each other.;)
No, that wasn't my point. My point was about honesty.
If both candidates were perfectly, 100% honest, neither of them would have made it to the primaries:) (sorry, couldn't resist)
Honesty in Politics. Good bog, what an endlessly debatable subject.
He said he never heard Wright say such things (even though he had been a member for decades and Wright says things like that a lot); he said he would never disown Wright (which he later did); and so on.
I also do not care about the Wright stuff itself, much. I do care about how he lied and manipulated to deal with it.
Shrug. I never said I consider him honest. Just more honest than McCain.
McCain's friendly circle is quite well known, and includes people who steal everything that isn't locked down.
That's an oddly false thing to say, but note again, I was not talking about the company he keeps, but his response to the "scandal" about it.
Yeah, he fucked that up, didn't he:) I have plenty of friends that would put me in the same boat as he, were I foolish enough to try to run for high public office. Some of them are very close friends, even.
He should have said "Yeah, I know the Reverend, and I've listened to his sermons. I agree with this and this point he makes, but not with that or the other one and I agree that sometimes he can be a bit inflammatory....
Or something. Something intelligent and not pandering.:)
McCain is no better at public speaking, really - he's had plenty of gaffes, some extremely embarassing. Iraq/Pakistan border comes to mind...
I guess if the public wanted intelligent people in office, they would vote them in. Except that intelligent people seem to be a rarity in the political arena. Why is that?;-)
While the political arena is overall a slimepit, the republican party is rather well known for the levels they will descend to, as you well know, given your position there.
Actually, it's quite clear in my area *snips a lot of stuff that's common all over and not directly relevant to the conversation*
I've lived in more than a dozen cities in the last 23 years (seen many more), and in my experience the R/D ratio tends to even itself out, overall. Even in "red or blue" states. (what a load of media horseshit that whole labeling system is. )
I offer as outside evidence the extremely close presidential popular votes of the last so many elections.;)
I have. Forgive me if I still think he's the lesser of the two evils.;)
Sorry, but I won't.
Tough shit, then *grins*
*shrug* - you are still playing the game.
I am, literally, fighting for liberty. Are you? If so, good.
Yes, I am. The difference as I see it between us is that while you feel a particular political party which you've put time and effort into is the solution to the problem, I don't feel that either party - or any of the other outside parties, for that matter - can solve the problem. They are not concentrating their resources on s
A wise man knows he is a fool. He does not force his foolishness on others. Instead, it is in his wisdom that he only answers the questions of those who seek him out. For even if he gives a foolish answer, he is merely provided what is asked of him. Such is the paradox of politics and having wise men as leaders in a democracy.
Let me just say that, as someone who's not a US citizen, the fact that you refer to your president as "Commander in Chief" scares me. A lot.
Why? That's the primary role of that position. People seem VERY confused on this subject. The president doesn't make legislation happen. The president can't tax anyone. The president is one of the three legs of the checks-and-balances system, with the congress and the courts impacting some issues far more than the president can or should.
Bush seems to be very confused on that issue as well.
Well, or his handlers are. No matter, I do concede that the Obama campaign is more interested -- and PERHAPS more insightful, though the jury's still out -- about some important technological issues. I just do not accept that he can be trusted on any of it.
Neither do I. But if I had no choice but to trust either of them, I'd take Obama over McCain, for reasons noted.
he had his technical stance up long, long ago
Right, just like his stance on the DC gun ban, which he favored before he opposed. Look, I am not trying to make Obama out to be a Kerry-style flip-flopper. But he simply does not have the experience for me to trust him, and he has shown many times that he cannot be trusted.
If he gets elected and he follows through on it, great. I won't hold my breath.
And I also won't sit here worrying about McCain, since most of this stuff won't happen anyway.
What worries me more than McCain's view on this stuff is that both of them back a shield law for reporters. This is far more important than all this stuff, IMO.
Good point, there.
My non-partisan stance befuddles you, or ?;)
Ha. Nah. I just don't know how Obama is "more honest." He certainly hasn't been very honest in this campaign. I didn't even bring up the Rev Wright stuff, or his various dishonest attacks on Hillary and McCain.
I'm not gonna go there. The barbecue is hot and there's a cold beer waiting for me.;) But my impression is that a lot of that was media hype. It's akin to saying, well, yeah, I have friends the fact of which I associate with them disqualifies me to be president because they are firebrands and occasionally say things that can be construed as racist. Whoop de fucking doo.
McCain's friendly circle is quite well known, and includes people who steal everything that isn't locked down.
While the political arena is overall a slimepit, the republican party is rather well known for the levels they will descend to, as you well know, given your position there. (root out your own evil, sayeth I)
I think he's a lot more honest about how he does feel about the issues, it doesn't feel - to me, yes - like he's playing the career game.
If you look at his history in Chicago and read what his contemporaries say about him, I don't think you'll feel the same way.
I have. Forgive me if I still think he's the lesser of the two evils.;)
You're entitled to form and hold your own opinions. For a little while longer, anyway.
Ha. I think I was just pwn3d.
Such was not my intention, but yeah, I think you were:)
As I noted before, I don't think our choice of Supreme Leader really matters anymore. The taint is much deeper and can't be rooted out by any form of free elections.
Your response is typical of the ones I get from many career republican voters. I find them just as amusing as the ones I get from the other end of the spectrum. Neither style of fanatic, in my opinion, has much of anything new to offer.
Fanatic? If you've read any of my posts over the years you'd see *I'm* not a fanatic.
I didn't say you were. I said the response was typical.
I have heavily criticized many Republicans, including McCain (which I did in this post!) and Bush, and I've actually posted defenses of both Kerry and Obama during their runs.
Whoa, ok. I wasn't attacking you:)
Yes, I usually vote Republican, but not because I a
I find the contrast between Obama's tech page and McCain's interesting in that in Obama's he talks more about what should be done... On that standpoint alone I would trust Obama more
Despite the fact that he's never actually DONE anything, and that he's already changed on many of the things he SAID he would do?:-)
Obama is at least paying attention; he had his technical stance up long, long ago. McCain waited until the point in the campaign where it was necessary to do so, and what he put up, as I noted, sounds more like a corporate resume than a reasonable, rational technology statement by a potential future leader of the most powerful country on the planet.
I am entirely non-partisan; while I think Obama is likely the more honest of the two
This befuddles me. I can't speak for YOU of course, but I wonder if the reason many people think this is because they believe that Obama "means well," so even if he goes back on something, well, he meant it at the time! And if McCain changes on something, well, he "obviously" was lying.
My non-partisan stance befuddles you, or ?;)
Does Obama "mean well"? I dunno, it's hard to tell, from a distance. I think he's a lot more honest about how he does feel about the issues, it doesn't feel - to me, yes - like he's playing the career game. McCain is, of course, a career professional.
I'm being completely honest when I say I'm non-partisan, if you've read any of my posts over the years you'd see *I'm* being honest.
Jamie, that was one hell of a great rant
I don't believe I have ever thought a rant was good that was almost entirely based on fabrications.
You're entitled to form and hold your own opinions. For a little while longer, anyway.
Your response is typical of the ones I get from many career republican voters. I find them just as amusing as the ones I get from the other end of the spectrum. Neither style of fanatic, in my opinion, has much of anything new to offer.
My my, a political tiff between editors. Who'da thunk? *grin*
Everyone is hypocritical to some extent. We judge others by *what* they are hypocritical about. (feel free to substitute "dishonest" for "hypocritical" in the above, although the two aren't exactly equivalent they are similar esp when discussing career politicians)
I find the contrast between Obama's tech page and McCain's interesting in that in Obama's he talks more about what should be done while McCain's reads more like a corporate resume. On that standpoint alone I would trust Obama more (although I don't agree with everything he says, either)
I am entirely non-partisan; while I think Obama is likely the more honest of the two, I don't think that either candidate has what it'll take to get the US out of the mess we are in. I don't believe that *anyone* could do that, at this point. The problem goes far, far beyond whomever is inhabiting the oval office this decade.
Anyway; continue, gentlemen. I think I'll write in Kodos this go around;) least of the evils, eh?
SB
No, I haven't had my coffee yet. But Jamie, that was one hell of a great rant; it made my morning a bit brighter and summed up my current bitterness quite elegantly. Thanks:)
You're exactly right, we pull the meter. And dispatch calls the electric utility and let's them know we did the disconnect so the owner doesn't get charged for it. Digging around trying to find a breaker box is nuts.
Different experiences, I guess. My experience is mostly with apartment buildings, and it's generally a lot quicker to hit the breaker panel inside the apartment than to go outside the apartment (or building in the case of my current job and it's about a two hundred foot trip from anywhere inside) and pull the meter. Of course there are variations on that... older buildings have their electrical panels in the weirdest locations, I once saw one in a water heater closet. (!)
BTW your sig is great; it's so damned true it makes me weep, especially since I've spent the last two years working in subsidized housing. Gah. Pay is good but it's demanding...;)
To the GP:
The last thing I want to do in a fire is start assuming that all the power goes though something.
Good point, although any breaker panel really should have a mains breaker. (a lot of apartment buildings I work on don't, unfortunately) and yeah, I realize that even that isn't 100% foolproof, but when you're in a hurry, well...
Given that the AC unit was on the second floor and relatively atmospherically isolated from the basement* I think it's much more likely it was a faulty AC or bad wiring/outlet; or slightly less likely they just hadn't cleaned their AC for years and the dust bunnies caught fire.
The first possibility - electrical fires - is by far the most common cause I've seen in more than ten years exp doing apartment building maintenance.
* A second floor window unit means probably a bedroom, one can assume about 2-3 doors between there and the basement that were generally closed; plus if the chemical content of the house air was strong enough to accumulate like that it would have been noticed by someone before, I'd think.
I definitely agree with the points about zoning, however.
The man is a professional chemist, not some home amateur. He obviously knew how to keep his lab safe, as there had been no problems with it ever before. Not even minor complaints, apparently.
Lab space is bloody expensive, and not all chemists are rich enough to afford their own private lab space (if such was even available in his area)
I will agree if he gets charged with a zoning violation; the law already was there and he should have been aware of it. But the authorities went very much overboard - at the very, very least, he should be compensated for the investment in his equipment; I bet I could make a good argument for compensation for loss of any ongoing work he had, too, if I were a lawyer;)
If I were him I would definitely bring a civil suit against the local authorities. The locals could simply have held him until a team of experts investigated the home and determined whether or not it was unsafe. Instead they confiscated and are going to destroy about half his livelihood (a guess, I have a home workshop that counts for about that much) for something that really only is worth a hefty fine and perhaps a demand that he move it elsewhere.
Ignorance of science by people in positions of power is an extremely bad thing...
Anytime there's an electrical fire, the first thing you want to do is to shut off the juice to the circuit. If the A/C was a hardwired unit or it was the outlet itself shorting* (or if the fire prevented them from coming close enough to unplug it) then the circuit breaker is your only option.
SB * by an odd coincidence I had to replace an A/C outlet that was doing just that - arcing internally - at work this week. Fortunately the tenant was relatively awake and noticed the buzzing sound coming from what he thought was the A/C unit itself.
"It could be argued that the Earth is a part of the 1st generation of terrestrial-like planets simply due to its age relative to that of the Universe as a whole."
I don't keep up on the field enough to know what the current thinking on heavy element formation is, but I disagree with that statement.
If the early (say >11 billion years) universe was a lot hotter and a lot more dense, than heavy element formation would have been more rapid than it is now. Supernovae would have been more powerful and perhaps more frequent.
Also, most of the galaxies in the early universe seem to be extremely active (quasars). Those same temps and pressures could have formed heavier elements a lot faster than mere supernova. Has anyone done any research on whether or not the environment near a black hole can create heavy elements and at what rate?
Just throwing ideas out there, probably thought of before.
Slashdot Mirror
So... you're basing your philosophy about space travel on comments made by someone before we sent people to orbit, and to the moon? Not to mention all the other successes since then?
Pardon me if I consider you full of shit. If everyone had followed that philosophy back then, we'd never even have achieved unmanned spaceflight, never mind manned.
Moron.
SB
I don't recall the article saying that it'd be the US that does it :)
(as a matter of fact I'd lay a nice sized bet *against* the US doing it or anything even remotely like it, and a smaller bet on a alliance between the ESA and Japan eventually doing projects like this - using chinese launchers. Sad, yes; I'm from the US and we used to fund big dreams here... :( )
SB
Actually, I'd be surprised if McCain had ever even visited Saturn.
I think everybody would. :)
SB
The crying shame is that the ideas in PopSci articles are within our reach but we never try and grab them.
Who is "we"?
The United States?
Can't argue with you there... ;)
SB
Though I'll admit that I'd feel much better about the project if they accomplished something large but nevertheless more modest, like say a suspension bridge using nanotubes. Though since steel cable serves perfectly well for that and will presumably be cheaper even when we can make suspension-bridge length nano-cables, that would be nothing but a feel-good exercise for people like me rather than a practical application.
I disagree with your last comment.
A suspension bridge might be a nice proof of concept for lower-strength cables, both for the cable design/construction and the industry that produces it.
Plus we'd likely learn a lot actually observing the cables (and attachment points) under various non-laboratory or unpredictable stresses.
Be nice investment PR as well, especially if it survived typhoons and earthquakes that damage other modern bridges. :)
This is cutting-edge enough that we (they?) are not going to be able to just say "okay, we have fibers and we've woven a few cables, now let's launch them." Design, test, improve; repeat.
Dunno if anyone else mentioned it, but Japan could benefit in many other ways from developing cables like these. Strengthening buildings, bridges, and roads against earthquakes would be one... so they have a strong national interest in this technology for more than just a space elevator.
Cheers,
SB
Translation for NG fans:
The virus is actually an alien computer system attempting to interface with the station's computer systems.
Picard: Data. Can __ you translate __ their message?
Data: Yes Captain. The message is, "Do you wish to have longer lasting relationships with your partners?"
Picard: Make it so... ;)
SB
This article meets the current low standards of reporting that has become endemic amongst much of the media
Fixed it for ya.
SB
Stand on their heads? ;)
Pity the north magnetic pole is out in the arctic ocean...
SB
The Monolith was already acting on Hal's mind:
"I'm sorry, Dave. I can't diagnose your psychosis because I'm currently experiencing one. Oh, and I'm going to kill your crewmates so that you shut me down and eventually I wake sane and become part of the local overmind. I apologize for the inconvenience." ...but he couldn't SAY that... :)
SB
From the video it looks like the orientation("setup") chute shrouds got caught on something on the main body of the craft as it left it's delivery sled, and never fully deployed. The oscillations that produced ensured that none of the rest of the chutes deployed correctly, by the time the mains deployed the craft was in a tumble.
I wonder if it isn't the way it was sledded out? It's orientation to the airflow from that sled is very very different than what it would be on a reentry (sideways to airflow vs heat shield facing down into airflow, hopefully, anyway.) Release malfunction?
That's what it looks like to me. The craft wasn't in the proper orientation for the chutes to deploy the way they were designed, and since the first set didn't nothing else worked either as the craft was completely out of control at that point.
Great video.
SB
First rule of chute packing: Pack your own.
Corollary to First Rule: Nobody else gets blamed for the fuckup if it malfunctions.
SB
*sigh* Supervillainy doesn't have the same draw it used to...
The role has gotten so tough lately that nobody wants the job anymore ;)
SB
SB
So the kidnappers dig the implant out of you*, tape it to the device and leave it somewhere...
SB
* Probably with a dull spoon.
sorry for the late reply, kinda lost it in a flood of RL ;)
... if I had no choice but to trust either of them, I'd take Obama over McCain, for reasons noted.
I didn't see any serious reasons, but OK.
Serious reasons? Mine are plenty serious, believe me. Just because I don't have the time to flood you with links, quotes and data doesn't mean I can't. Not to mention that in this story thread I'd have been redundant even when we were first replying to each other. ;)
No, that wasn't my point. My point was about honesty.
If both candidates were perfectly, 100% honest, neither of them would have made it to the primaries :) (sorry, couldn't resist)
Honesty in Politics. Good bog, what an endlessly debatable subject.
He said he never heard Wright say such things (even though he had been a member for decades and Wright says things like that a lot); he said he would never disown Wright (which he later did); and so on.
I also do not care about the Wright stuff itself, much. I do care about how he lied and manipulated to deal with it.
Shrug. I never said I consider him honest. Just more honest than McCain.
McCain's friendly circle is quite well known, and includes people who steal everything that isn't locked down.
That's an oddly false thing to say, but note again, I was not talking about the company he keeps, but his response to the "scandal" about it.
Yeah, he fucked that up, didn't he :) I have plenty of friends that would put me in the same boat as he, were I foolish enough to try to run for high public office. Some of them are very close friends, even.
He should have said "Yeah, I know the Reverend, and I've listened to his sermons. I agree with this and this point he makes, but not with that or the other one and I agree that sometimes he can be a bit inflammatory. ...
Or something. Something intelligent and not pandering. :)
McCain is no better at public speaking, really - he's had plenty of gaffes, some extremely embarassing. Iraq/Pakistan border comes to mind...
I guess if the public wanted intelligent people in office, they would vote them in. Except that intelligent people seem to be a rarity in the political arena. Why is that? ;-)
While the political arena is overall a slimepit, the republican party is rather well known for the levels they will descend to, as you well know, given your position there.
Actually, it's quite clear in my area *snips a lot of stuff that's common all over and not directly relevant to the conversation*
I've lived in more than a dozen cities in the last 23 years (seen many more), and in my experience the R/D ratio tends to even itself out, overall. Even in "red or blue" states. (what a load of media horseshit that whole labeling system is. )
I offer as outside evidence the extremely close presidential popular votes of the last so many elections. ;)
I have. Forgive me if I still think he's the lesser of the two evils. ;)
Sorry, but I won't.
Tough shit, then *grins*
*shrug* - you are still playing the game.
I am, literally, fighting for liberty. Are you? If so, good.
Yes, I am. The difference as I see it between us is that while you feel a particular political party which you've put time and effort into is the solution to the problem, I don't feel that either party - or any of the other outside parties, for that matter - can solve the problem. They are not concentrating their resources on s
A wise man knows he is a fool. He does not force his foolishness on others. Instead, it is in his wisdom that he only answers the questions of those who seek him out. For even if he gives a foolish answer, he is merely provided what is asked of him. Such is the paradox of politics and having wise men as leaders in a democracy.
Well said.
SB
Let me just say that, as someone who's not a US citizen, the fact that you refer to your president as "Commander in Chief" scares me. A lot.
Why? That's the primary role of that position. People seem VERY confused on this subject. The president doesn't make legislation happen. The president can't tax anyone. The president is one of the three legs of the checks-and-balances system, with the congress and the courts impacting some issues far more than the president can or should.
Bush seems to be very confused on that issue as well.
SB
Obama is at least paying attention ...
Well, or his handlers are. No matter, I do concede that the Obama campaign is more interested -- and PERHAPS more insightful, though the jury's still out -- about some important technological issues. I just do not accept that he can be trusted on any of it.
Neither do I. But if I had no choice but to trust either of them, I'd take Obama over McCain, for reasons noted.
he had his technical stance up long, long ago
Right, just like his stance on the DC gun ban, which he favored before he opposed. Look, I am not trying to make Obama out to be a Kerry-style flip-flopper. But he simply does not have the experience for me to trust him, and he has shown many times that he cannot be trusted.
If he gets elected and he follows through on it, great. I won't hold my breath.
And I also won't sit here worrying about McCain, since most of this stuff won't happen anyway.
What worries me more than McCain's view on this stuff is that both of them back a shield law for reporters. This is far more important than all this stuff, IMO.
Good point, there.
My non-partisan stance befuddles you, or ? ;)
Ha. Nah. I just don't know how Obama is "more honest." He certainly hasn't been very honest in this campaign. I didn't even bring up the Rev Wright stuff, or his various dishonest attacks on Hillary and McCain.
I'm not gonna go there. The barbecue is hot and there's a cold beer waiting for me. ;) But my impression is that a lot of that was media hype. It's akin to saying, well, yeah, I have friends the fact of which I associate with them disqualifies me to be president because they are firebrands and occasionally say things that can be construed as racist. Whoop de fucking doo.
McCain's friendly circle is quite well known, and includes people who steal everything that isn't locked down.
While the political arena is overall a slimepit, the republican party is rather well known for the levels they will descend to, as you well know, given your position there. (root out your own evil, sayeth I)
I think he's a lot more honest about how he does feel about the issues, it doesn't feel - to me, yes - like he's playing the career game.
If you look at his history in Chicago and read what his contemporaries say about him, I don't think you'll feel the same way.
I have. Forgive me if I still think he's the lesser of the two evils. ;)
You're entitled to form and hold your own opinions. For a little while longer, anyway.
Ha. I think I was just pwn3d.
Such was not my intention, but yeah, I think you were :)
As I noted before, I don't think our choice of Supreme Leader really matters anymore. The taint is much deeper and can't be rooted out by any form of free elections.
Your response is typical of the ones I get from many career republican voters. I find them just as amusing as the ones I get from the other end of the spectrum. Neither style of fanatic, in my opinion, has much of anything new to offer.
Fanatic? If you've read any of my posts over the years you'd see *I'm* not a fanatic.
I didn't say you were. I said the response was typical.
I have heavily criticized many Republicans, including McCain (which I did in this post!) and Bush, and I've actually posted defenses of both Kerry and Obama during their runs.
Whoa, ok. I wasn't attacking you :)
Yes, I usually vote Republican, but not because I a
I find the contrast between Obama's tech page and McCain's interesting in that in Obama's he talks more about what should be done ... On that standpoint alone I would trust Obama more
Despite the fact that he's never actually DONE anything, and that he's already changed on many of the things he SAID he would do? :-)
Obama is at least paying attention; he had his technical stance up long, long ago. McCain waited until the point in the campaign where it was necessary to do so, and what he put up, as I noted, sounds more like a corporate resume than a reasonable, rational technology statement by a potential future leader of the most powerful country on the planet.
I am entirely non-partisan; while I think Obama is likely the more honest of the two
This befuddles me. I can't speak for YOU of course, but I wonder if the reason many people think this is because they believe that Obama "means well," so even if he goes back on something, well, he meant it at the time! And if McCain changes on something, well, he "obviously" was lying.
My non-partisan stance befuddles you, or ? ;)
Does Obama "mean well"? I dunno, it's hard to tell, from a distance. I think he's a lot more honest about how he does feel about the issues, it doesn't feel - to me, yes - like he's playing the career game. McCain is, of course, a career professional.
I'm being completely honest when I say I'm non-partisan, if you've read any of my posts over the years you'd see *I'm* being honest.
Jamie, that was one hell of a great rant
I don't believe I have ever thought a rant was good that was almost entirely based on fabrications.
You're entitled to form and hold your own opinions. For a little while longer, anyway.
Your response is typical of the ones I get from many career republican voters. I find them just as amusing as the ones I get from the other end of the spectrum. Neither style of fanatic, in my opinion, has much of anything new to offer.
I'm still voting for Kodos. ;)
Cheers,
SB
My my, a political tiff between editors. Who'da thunk? *grin*
Everyone is hypocritical to some extent. We judge others by *what* they are hypocritical about. (feel free to substitute "dishonest" for "hypocritical" in the above, although the two aren't exactly equivalent they are similar esp when discussing career politicians)
I find the contrast between Obama's tech page and McCain's interesting in that in Obama's he talks more about what should be done while McCain's reads more like a corporate resume. On that standpoint alone I would trust Obama more (although I don't agree with everything he says, either)
I am entirely non-partisan; while I think Obama is likely the more honest of the two, I don't think that either candidate has what it'll take to get the US out of the mess we are in. I don't believe that *anyone* could do that, at this point. The problem goes far, far beyond whomever is inhabiting the oval office this decade.
Anyway; continue, gentlemen. I think I'll write in Kodos this go around ;) least of the evils, eh?
SB
No, I haven't had my coffee yet. But Jamie, that was one hell of a great rant; it made my morning a bit brighter and summed up my current bitterness quite elegantly. Thanks :)
You're exactly right, we pull the meter. And dispatch calls the electric utility and let's them know we did the disconnect so the owner doesn't get charged for it. Digging around trying to find a breaker box is nuts.
Different experiences, I guess. My experience is mostly with apartment buildings, and it's generally a lot quicker to hit the breaker panel inside the apartment than to go outside the apartment (or building in the case of my current job and it's about a two hundred foot trip from anywhere inside) and pull the meter. Of course there are variations on that... older buildings have their electrical panels in the weirdest locations, I once saw one in a water heater closet. (!)
BTW your sig is great; it's so damned true it makes me weep, especially since I've spent the last two years working in subsidized housing. Gah. Pay is good but it's demanding... ;)
To the GP:
The last thing I want to do in a fire is start assuming that all the power goes though something.
Good point, although any breaker panel really should have a mains breaker. (a lot of apartment buildings I work on don't, unfortunately) and yeah, I realize that even that isn't 100% foolproof, but when you're in a hurry, well...
Cheers!
SB
Given that the AC unit was on the second floor and relatively atmospherically isolated from the basement* I think it's much more likely it was a faulty AC or bad wiring/outlet; or slightly less likely they just hadn't cleaned their AC for years and the dust bunnies caught fire.
The first possibility - electrical fires - is by far the most common cause I've seen in more than ten years exp doing apartment building maintenance.
* A second floor window unit means probably a bedroom, one can assume about 2-3 doors between there and the basement that were generally closed; plus if the chemical content of the house air was strong enough to accumulate like that it would have been noticed by someone before, I'd think.
I definitely agree with the points about zoning, however.
Cheers,
SB
A couple points:
The man is a professional chemist, not some home amateur. He obviously knew how to keep his lab safe, as there had been no problems with it ever before. Not even minor complaints, apparently.
Lab space is bloody expensive, and not all chemists are rich enough to afford their own private lab space (if such was even available in his area)
I will agree if he gets charged with a zoning violation; the law already was there and he should have been aware of it. But the authorities went very much overboard - at the very, very least, he should be compensated for the investment in his equipment; I bet I could make a good argument for compensation for loss of any ongoing work he had, too, if I were a lawyer ;)
If I were him I would definitely bring a civil suit against the local authorities. The locals could simply have held him until a team of experts investigated the home and determined whether or not it was unsafe. Instead they confiscated and are going to destroy about half his livelihood (a guess, I have a home workshop that counts for about that much) for something that really only is worth a hefty fine and perhaps a demand that he move it elsewhere.
Ignorance of science by people in positions of power is an extremely bad thing...
SB
Anytime there's an electrical fire, the first thing you want to do is to shut off the juice to the circuit. If the A/C was a hardwired unit or it was the outlet itself shorting* (or if the fire prevented them from coming close enough to unplug it) then the circuit breaker is your only option.
SB
* by an odd coincidence I had to replace an A/C outlet that was doing just that - arcing internally - at work this week. Fortunately the tenant was relatively awake and noticed the buzzing sound coming from what he thought was the A/C unit itself.
"It could be argued that the Earth is a part of the 1st generation of terrestrial-like planets simply due to its age relative to that of the Universe as a whole."
I don't keep up on the field enough to know what the current thinking on heavy element formation is, but I disagree with that statement.
If the early (say >11 billion years) universe was a lot hotter and a lot more dense, than heavy element formation would have been more rapid than it is now. Supernovae would have been more powerful and perhaps more frequent.
Also, most of the galaxies in the early universe seem to be extremely active (quasars). Those same temps and pressures could have formed heavier elements a lot faster than mere supernova. Has anyone done any research on whether or not the environment near a black hole can create heavy elements and at what rate?
Just throwing ideas out there, probably thought of before.
SB