Maybe YOUR wisdom teeth extractions were simple, but not all are. Although I was not knocked out either, mine had to be taken out in pieces in two different sessions. Not simple at all. I can easily see how some people would prefer to be unconscious, and it does happen.
It is simply not done often in tooth extraction because it is much more dangerous than locals and you have to have an anesthesiologist in attendance during the surgery.
You've never taken ANY mood altering drugs including coffee and you fell into a paranoid dilution [sic] when you had nitrous oxide at a dentist office. For some reason I am not surprised. I also assume you don't exercise because of the mood-altering endorphins produced.
Normal human behavior falls along a continuum where some pleasant things are allowed in life. The taste and social enhancements of fine scotches, wines and coffees are some of those things that can enhance life's experiences, and yes, make you a better person. Really, just eating food makes you feel better. True, placing oneself at one end of the bell curve where these things are used excessively is negative and pathological behavior, placing oneself at the complete other end of the continuum seems just as pathological to me.
Everything you said was correct (and blindingly clear in the summary) up until your last sentence - which was pathetically stupid.
Let's see - you fixed the biggest hole in your gas tank so you're just going to leave the other holes because they can't be a problem because you can now put gas in the tank faster than it leaks out? Let's don't even talk about the Chinese and Indians who keep punching more and bigger holes in it.
This is only seems counter-intuitive because of the wording of the title. If instead of Obstacles Speed Evacuation the title had been "Shaped Exits Speed Evacuations" it would not have seemed odd at all. There is a difference between counter-intuitive and "not thought of before". The title of the article is unfortunate because it will mean acceptance by fire-safety professionals and and architects will be slower than it could have been.
I'd be very careful placing obstacles which might lead to more well-behaved behavior in scientific tests (left, right, left, right, that's so much better) but would be very danerous in a real panicking crowd.
This isn't behavior modification - it's fluid dynamics. These techniques will work just as well in a panic situation as they will in an orderly evacuation because they do NOT rely on human behavior to speed egress. In fact that's the point of the study.
You are misinterpreting the research. The study says nothing about narrowing the exit, but instead talks about guiding the flow of people to the exit in ways that reduce congestion. It is similar to better aerodynamics reducing turbulent flow.
This isn't mammalian group behavior - it's physics. Reduced crowding as a result of an obstacle inserted into a pathway isn't human behavior any more than gumballs funneled from a vending machine is gumball behavior.
That would be "simulation" not "emulation". Emulation is copying the behavior or characteristics of another. They were simulating bird strikes, they were not emulating bird strikes. And although I know you will argue, they are not synonyms.
I have to agree. No wonder he doesn't make any money - the ads are at the bottom of a long page that no one in his right mind would scroll through (much less read). What a mess. Frankly, he should be paying visitors - not the other way around.
He might qualify for a new Guinness record though: "Most one-time visitors to a web page".
I smell baloney. First, where did you get the idea that ultrasound would be used? I read nothing of the sort. So your statement that ultrasound only travels a few meters in water may be true, but has no bearing on the topic and certainly doesn't prove that anyone was wrong or that the technique would not work.
Second, you are apparently confused about the need for huge "resonant cavities". What resonant cavities? We are not talking about sizing antennae to detect EM radiation, but about simple propagation of pressure waves. Since there is no need to size antenna to be some multiple of the wavelength to detect sounds I see no technical reason the lenses could not be reaonably sized. After all, human ears can detect sound in the 30 to 20,000 Hz range without being meters across, so your insistence that huge impossible receivers would be needed makes no sense. The researchers' technique uses the differences in the speed of sound in various media to focus the sound. It does not "receive" the sound and then amplify it. So there is no need to size components to be multiples of wavelengths.
I downloaded last.fm on my iTouch. It was approved by Apple. Did I have the slightest idea that using it might be illegal and get me sued? No I did not. I assumed that because it was an approved Apple app it was legal. Stupid me, I guess.
If users start getting sued I would think there should be recourse to Apple's deep pockets for setting them up with an approved app that causes them to violate the law if used. And no, before you object, there is apprently no way to use last.fm on an iPhone in a legal way - so it isn't a choice of the user to mis-use this official Apple app for illegal purposes.
I agree that this is bad advice. In fact it is VERY bad advice. Get the Master's degree. Everybody will have two years experience in two years, but you will have an advanced degree. Also, you will not want to stay in the low-end of your career forever and a Master's degree will open you up to management positions that mere experience will not.
The second amendment was written specifically to have an armed populace so the government wouldn't get oppressive.
Actually that's just your interpretation. Since at the time of its writing soldiers brought their own guns to war, a more logical reading is that a well-regulated militia made up of citizens bringing their own guns is needed to preserve the State.
We lose control of letters when we mail them, so by your reasoning we should have no expectation of privacy when we mail a letter.
There is a logical disconnect in your position that simply because it is theoretically possible to breach privacy in electronic communications that there is no privacy. You seem to be saying that just because the government CAN do something it means that it is OK for it to be able to do it. It is possible for the government to employ censors to look through walls to see what you we are doing in our own homes - do you therefore think that we have no expectation of privacy our own homes and therefore the government is free to peer into them?
Privacy isn't really related to what CAN be read or seen by the government, it is about what we ALLOW the government to read and see. Privacy is defined by laws, not walls.
Re:When I think about the internet in 1996
on
Jurassic Web
·
· Score: 1
Yes. I remember the very first time I managed to get connected via IP in 1995. I was amazed, simply amazed. I found myself walking around the room talking to myself about how this was going to change the world! And it did!
I used YOUR figures...so now you want to change them? OK.
1) What extra weight? Cars have to have shocks anyway. 2) 100-200 watts sounds right, so even over less bumpy roads the shocks should be able to supply a significant portion of the electrical power for the vehicle. 3) The car's electrics are always run by the battery - the alternator simply charges the battery. I don't see a problem with taking over some of the alternator's duties, nor do I see "breaking down the battery" as being even remotely likely. (Which is it, btw - they don't produce enough power to be useful or they produce so much they will destroy the battery?) 4) $500? Maintenance? Extra weight? Now you're just grasping as straws just to be right. Your original argument was they didn't produce enough POWER, not that they cost too much or weighed too much, or took too much maintenance... none of which you or I know.
But since and 0.5 HP equals 325 watts, and the typical alternator at cruising speed is putting out less than 500 watts, that's a significant load taken off the alternator in every day driving.
I can easily see the possibility of measurable mileage improvements in any car where these shocks are used to supplement alternator-charging of the battery.
I saw a cop on a Segway at the airport a couple of weeks ago and for the life of me I couldn't understand what benefits such a clumsy way of moving around might have over walking. Save some of the calories from donuts? Employ disabled cops? I don't get it.
Height: A cop on a Segway stands taller than the crowds and has excellent visibility of the area and people. I also saw an officer directing traffic at a polling place during the election using a Segway. He was clearly visible from a distance and it greatly helped his directions to be understood.
And like the other reply: speed. I;m sure the cop you saw at the airport was moving slowly, but that doesn't mean he has to.
Modern aircraft compare extremely well to their 1960s counterparts - the best example is that of 'ETOPS' (Extended Twin Engine Operational Performance Standard), or 'LROPS' as it is known today (Long Range Operational Performance Standard).
I thought ETOPS stood for "Engines Turn Or Passengers Swim".:)
Do I wish that I could have taken a trip on a 747 in the glory days of Pan Am? Absolutly. Would I rather live now and have the ability to fly to London for $500 bucks? You bet your a$$.
You can still do that, except it won't be on an American carrier - it will be on Singapore Airlines. They have fare deals occasionally so it can even be affordable. Everyone who flies should fly Singapore Air at least once. Their coach class is nearly as good as U.S. carriers' business class.
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe YOUR wisdom teeth extractions were simple, but not all are. Although I was not knocked out either, mine had to be taken out in pieces in two different sessions. Not simple at all. I can easily see how some people would prefer to be unconscious, and it does happen.
It is simply not done often in tooth extraction because it is much more dangerous than locals and you have to have an anesthesiologist in attendance during the surgery.
You've never taken ANY mood altering drugs including coffee and you fell into a paranoid dilution [sic] when you had nitrous oxide at a dentist office. For some reason I am not surprised. I also assume you don't exercise because of the mood-altering endorphins produced.
Normal human behavior falls along a continuum where some pleasant things are allowed in life. The taste and social enhancements of fine scotches, wines and coffees are some of those things that can enhance life's experiences, and yes, make you a better person. Really, just eating food makes you feel better. True, placing oneself at one end of the bell curve where these things are used excessively is negative and pathological behavior, placing oneself at the complete other end of the continuum seems just as pathological to me.
Everything you said was correct (and blindingly clear in the summary) up until your last sentence - which was pathetically stupid.
Let's see - you fixed the biggest hole in your gas tank so you're just going to leave the other holes because they can't be a problem because you can now put gas in the tank faster than it leaks out? Let's don't even talk about the Chinese and Indians who keep punching more and bigger holes in it.
This is only seems counter-intuitive because of the wording of the title. If instead of Obstacles Speed Evacuation the title had been "Shaped Exits Speed Evacuations" it would not have seemed odd at all. There is a difference between counter-intuitive and "not thought of before". The title of the article is unfortunate because it will mean acceptance by fire-safety professionals and and architects will be slower than it could have been.
I'd be very careful placing obstacles which might lead to more well-behaved behavior in scientific tests (left, right, left, right, that's so much better) but would be very danerous in a real panicking crowd.
This isn't behavior modification - it's fluid dynamics. These techniques will work just as well in a panic situation as they will in an orderly evacuation because they do NOT rely on human behavior to speed egress. In fact that's the point of the study.
You are misinterpreting the research. The study says nothing about narrowing the exit, but instead talks about guiding the flow of people to the exit in ways that reduce congestion. It is similar to better aerodynamics reducing turbulent flow.
This isn't mammalian group behavior - it's physics. Reduced crowding as a result of an obstacle inserted into a pathway isn't human behavior any more than gumballs funneled from a vending machine is gumball behavior.
That would be "simulation" not "emulation". Emulation is copying the behavior or characteristics of another. They were simulating bird strikes, they were not emulating bird strikes. And although I know you will argue, they are not synonyms.
I have to agree. No wonder he doesn't make any money - the ads are at the bottom of a long page that no one in his right mind would scroll through (much less read). What a mess. Frankly, he should be paying visitors - not the other way around.
He might qualify for a new Guinness record though: "Most one-time visitors to a web page".
I smell baloney. First, where did you get the idea that ultrasound would be used? I read nothing of the sort. So your statement that ultrasound only travels a few meters in water may be true, but has no bearing on the topic and certainly doesn't prove that anyone was wrong or that the technique would not work.
Second, you are apparently confused about the need for huge "resonant cavities". What resonant cavities? We are not talking about sizing antennae to detect EM radiation, but about simple propagation of pressure waves. Since there is no need to size antenna to be some multiple of the wavelength to detect sounds I see no technical reason the lenses could not be reaonably sized. After all, human ears can detect sound in the 30 to 20,000 Hz range without being meters across, so your insistence that huge impossible receivers would be needed makes no sense. The researchers' technique uses the differences in the speed of sound in various media to focus the sound. It does not "receive" the sound and then amplify it. So there is no need to size components to be multiples of wavelengths.
...and by the way you are now on the Federal no-fly list.
I downloaded last.fm on my iTouch. It was approved by Apple. Did I have the slightest idea that using it might be illegal and get me sued? No I did not. I assumed that because it was an approved Apple app it was legal. Stupid me, I guess.
If users start getting sued I would think there should be recourse to Apple's deep pockets for setting them up with an approved app that causes them to violate the law if used. And no, before you object, there is apprently no way to use last.fm on an iPhone in a legal way - so it isn't a choice of the user to mis-use this official Apple app for illegal purposes.
I agree that this is bad advice. In fact it is VERY bad advice. Get the Master's degree. Everybody will have two years experience in two years, but you will have an advanced degree. Also, you will not want to stay in the low-end of your career forever and a Master's degree will open you up to management positions that mere experience will not.
Well actually.... they won't sell you a key or an electronic fob unless you can prove you own the car.
Actually that's just your interpretation. Since at the time of its writing soldiers brought their own guns to war, a more logical reading is that a well-regulated militia made up of citizens bringing their own guns is needed to preserve the State.
Really? You've never heard of photography?
We lose control of letters when we mail them, so by your reasoning we should have no expectation of privacy when we mail a letter.
There is a logical disconnect in your position that simply because it is theoretically possible to breach privacy in electronic communications that there is no privacy. You seem to be saying that just because the government CAN do something it means that it is OK for it to be able to do it. It is possible for the government to employ censors to look through walls to see what you we are doing in our own homes - do you therefore think that we have no expectation of privacy our own homes and therefore the government is free to peer into them?
Privacy isn't really related to what CAN be read or seen by the government, it is about what we ALLOW the government to read and see. Privacy is defined by laws, not walls.
Yes. I remember the very first time I managed to get connected via IP in 1995. I was amazed, simply amazed. I found myself walking around the room talking to myself about how this was going to change the world! And it did!
OK, you're PV cells...
No, we are not PV cells.
Oh gosh - it's not perfect!? Let's just forget about it then.
A rifle that fires decoy bullets...GUIDED decoy bullets... a bullet with an electromagnetic pulse destabilizer!!? How old are you?
I used YOUR figures...so now you want to change them? OK.
1) What extra weight? Cars have to have shocks anyway.
2) 100-200 watts sounds right, so even over less bumpy roads the shocks should be able to supply a significant portion of the electrical power for the vehicle.
3) The car's electrics are always run by the battery - the alternator simply charges the battery. I don't see a problem with taking over some of the alternator's duties, nor do I see "breaking down the battery" as being even remotely likely. (Which is it, btw - they don't produce enough power to be useful or they produce so much they will destroy the battery?)
4) $500? Maintenance? Extra weight? Now you're just grasping as straws just to be right. Your original argument was they didn't produce enough POWER, not that they cost too much or weighed too much, or took too much maintenance... none of which you or I know.
But since and 0.5 HP equals 325 watts, and the typical alternator at cruising speed is putting out less than 500 watts, that's a significant load taken off the alternator in every day driving.
I can easily see the possibility of measurable mileage improvements in any car where these shocks are used to supplement alternator-charging of the battery.
I saw a cop on a Segway at the airport a couple of weeks ago and for the life of me I couldn't understand what benefits such a clumsy way of moving around might have over walking. Save some of the calories from donuts? Employ disabled cops? I don't get it.
Height: A cop on a Segway stands taller than the crowds and has excellent visibility of the area and people. I also saw an officer directing traffic at a polling place during the election using a Segway. He was clearly visible from a distance and it greatly helped his directions to be understood.
And like the other reply: speed. I;m sure the cop you saw at the airport was moving slowly, but that doesn't mean he has to.
Modern aircraft compare extremely well to their 1960s counterparts - the best example is that of 'ETOPS' (Extended Twin Engine Operational Performance Standard), or 'LROPS' as it is known today (Long Range Operational Performance Standard).
I thought ETOPS stood for "Engines Turn Or Passengers Swim". :)
Do I wish that I could have taken a trip on a 747 in the glory days of Pan Am? Absolutly. Would I rather live now and have the ability to fly to London for $500 bucks? You bet your a$$.
You can still do that, except it won't be on an American carrier - it will be on Singapore Airlines. They have fare deals occasionally so it can even be affordable. Everyone who flies should fly Singapore Air at least once. Their coach class is nearly as good as U.S. carriers' business class.