Not sure how I screwed that up. Anyway, it's a pretty small error and doesn't change much; the 50-60 C cited above is still the best serving range (131-140 C).
In other words, "Tort Reformer AC" is arguing that 85 - 95 C is the proper temperature at which to serve coffee (185-200F), whereas everyone with common sense is telling him that's nuts, and that 50 - 60 C is probably a better temperature at which to serve coffee, although even that's a little too hot to drink. But we all prefer it a little on the hot side, cince it will cool down before you finish it.
Actually, once you put it all into degrees Celsius, it becomes even more obvious how clueless "Tort Reformer AC"'s arguement is.
Re:Do more research before your start trolling
on
The Voice of Groklaw
·
· Score: 1
Depends. If you're preparing it in one of those French-style coffee pots where you let the coffee seep in hot water and press the grounds out of it, which is how I prefer my coffee, then you boil the water first and wait a minute or two for it to cool down below boiling. Then you pour it over the coffee grinds and wait several minutes for it to seep and cool down further before drinking it.
Try it, it tastes *much* better that way.
To Avoiding the Mickey D Coffee Thread Below
on
The Voice of Groklaw
·
· Score: 1
... set post threshold to 1, and reparenting to off.
Hey, you're the one who brought up the tired and recycled "McDonald's Coffee Lawsuit Shows Stupidity of American Juries" motif. At least I think it was you, kinda hard to tell you AC's apart. You all look alike to me.
Not to mention that the number of customers complaining of burn incidents will most likely be a small fraction of customers experiencing burn incidents.
Nor that the number of cups of coffee sold is likely a worldwide figure, where the complaint count is likely a US figure.
"Optimum coffee serving temperature: 185 to 200 degrees F (source. Coast Coffee)"
That's bonkers. 185-200 might be a good temperature to *prepare* the coffee, so it doesn't get scalded, but that's *way* too hot for drinking.
I urge you to test this for yourself. Please take photographs, so we can all fall off our chairs laughing at your self-inflicted third degree mouth burns.
140 degrees, give or take 10 according to taste and tolerance, is about the best temperature to serve coffee.
Re:The true power of Open Source work
on
The Voice of Groklaw
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Given IBM's citation of sources on Groklaw in the SCO case, I'm sure at least some IBM lawyers are checking Groklaw regularly.
Re:Do more research before your start trolling
on
The Voice of Groklaw
·
· Score: 4, Informative
"The coffee was perfectly safe..."
As long as you didn't accidentally spill it on yourself, in which case you required skin grafts and 10 days hospitalization.
Sorry, dude, but you must be using a different dictionary for the phrase "perfectly safe" than the one I use.
"She spilled the coffee, McDonald's did not."
McDonald's heated it to over 180 degrees, possibly much higher, given the pressure it was kept under. Not the customer.
And I'm not sure what universe you live in where 180 degrees is "well short of the boiling point", maybe one where Vonnegut's Ice-9 is commonplace, but here on Planet Earth the boiling point is 212 degrees at sea level, and lower at higher altitudes, so I'd say 180 degrees is pretty close to boiling.
Not forgotten. Bloom had a broken rib or something. When they took it in to post-production, Jacksone asked them to animate the horse-mounting, and that's what WETA came up with.
While we're on the subject, does anyone know if Deb testing is 2.6 friendly? I assume it is, but just looking to see what the experiences are of the people who've played with it already.
I actually think this is a good idea, but it would have to be accompanied by an increase in mod points for each moderator.
Why?
Well, at only 5 moderator points, people would be reluctant to further mod up a post that has already gone up one, knowing that their moderation will only be half as effective. Once a post gets to +2, they'll be even more reluctant, realizing that it will take 4 moderations to push it up a point. And so on.
In order to overcome that reluctance, people would need more mod points.
Alternately, and now that I think of it, this might be an even better solution, you could fractionalize the mod points. For instance, if someone mods a post that is already +2, then they only lose 1/4 point instead of 1 point.
While I agree with many that Duke Nuke'em Forever, and Doom III, must be on the list of this year's Best Vaporware, and disagree the Longhorn should be on it since Longhorn wasn't promised for this year, the absolute number 1 piece of vaporware for the must be:
SCO License for IP in Linux
I mean, come on. SCO hasn't only promised repeatedly that it would be *required* for businesses running Linux, but they've threatened to *sue* any Linux using business that didn't buy one.
Not only has the license not materialized, they're *still* threatening to sue someone who doesn't buy it within 90 days. Yep, you read that right, they're threatening to sue someone who hasn't bought a license that they don't sell. Oh, they won't say who it will be yet either. Vaporsuit, vaporinfringement, vaporinfringer, vaporlicense: VAPORWARE!
The absolute King of Vapor for the year 2003. No contest.
Actually, there are lots of companies that don't bother to register their copyrights until they need them for court. For instance, the copyrights IBM alleges that SCO violated weren't registered until August 2003.
Given that smaller companies may be more likely to lose the materials they need to register copyrights later, we may see more outcomes like this if the individuals involved are persistent in their demands that companies claiing rights in such projects back it up with evidence.
"Roland, unable to find documentation establishing a copyright on the MT-32's ROM, has yielded to the project and allowed distribution of the emulator to continue."
That wouldn't stop SCO. I mean, at this point, can you really imagine the following sentence appearing anywhere:
SCO unable to find any code in Linux that matches code in Unixware or System V, has yielded to IBM and the Linux community and will no longer threaten Linux users with suing. "We goofed," Darl McBride, SCO CEO, admitted. "Sorry about that guys. No hard feelings, right?"
Slashdot Mirror
131-140 F, not C.
OK, I'm a typo-ridden doofus.
Whoops. Math error.
140 F = 60 C
Not sure how I screwed that up. Anyway, it's a pretty small error and doesn't change much; the 50-60 C cited above is still the best serving range (131-140 C).
Sure.
212 F = 100 C
180 F = 82.2 C
140 F = 57.67 C
In other words, "Tort Reformer AC" is arguing that 85 - 95 C is the proper temperature at which to serve coffee (185-200F), whereas everyone with common sense is telling him that's nuts, and that 50 - 60 C is probably a better temperature at which to serve coffee, although even that's a little too hot to drink. But we all prefer it a little on the hot side, cince it will cool down before you finish it.
Actually, once you put it all into degrees Celsius, it becomes even more obvious how clueless "Tort Reformer AC"'s arguement is.
Depends. If you're preparing it in one of those French-style coffee pots where you let the coffee seep in hot water and press the grounds out of it, which is how I prefer my coffee, then you boil the water first and wait a minute or two for it to cool down below boiling. Then you pour it over the coffee grinds and wait several minutes for it to seep and cool down further before drinking it.
Try it, it tastes *much* better that way.
Hey, you're the one who brought up the tired and recycled "McDonald's Coffee Lawsuit Shows Stupidity of American Juries" motif. At least I think it was you, kinda hard to tell you AC's apart. You all look alike to me.
What? You weren't expecting a response?
Right.
And to maintain the freshness of steak, store it in a freezer or hold it at about 40 degrees farenheit if planning to prepare that day.
But I wouldn't want it served that way, unless I was going for the steak tartare.
Not to mention that the number of customers complaining of burn incidents will most likely be a small fraction of customers experiencing burn incidents.
Nor that the number of cups of coffee sold is likely a worldwide figure, where the complaint count is likely a US figure.
"It's 5th grade science. Look up the boiling point. Do the math. You are talking a difference of 32 degrees. Hot, but no where near boiling."
212 (boiling point) - 32 (freezing point) = 180
180 (range of temperature in degrees farenheit)
-32 (degrees below boiling point)
---
148
148/180 ~ 82% of the distance between freezing and boiling
Yep, 82%. Still looks pretty close to boiling to me.
It's not right. Pamela lives somewhere in the Northeast, not in Minnesota.
There are no pictures of PJ on the Internet, as far as I know. She likes to guard her privacy as much as is possible under the circumstances.
"Might i suggest that the lameness filter be modified to disallow the word McDonalds and lawsuit to be used in the same post."
Seconded!
"Optimum coffee serving temperature: 185 to 200 degrees F (source. Coast Coffee)"
That's bonkers. 185-200 might be a good temperature to *prepare* the coffee, so it doesn't get scalded, but that's *way* too hot for drinking.
I urge you to test this for yourself. Please take photographs, so we can all fall off our chairs laughing at your self-inflicted third degree mouth burns.
140 degrees, give or take 10 according to taste and tolerance, is about the best temperature to serve coffee.
Given IBM's citation of sources on Groklaw in the SCO case, I'm sure at least some IBM lawyers are checking Groklaw regularly.
"The coffee was perfectly safe..."
As long as you didn't accidentally spill it on yourself, in which case you required skin grafts and 10 days hospitalization.
Sorry, dude, but you must be using a different dictionary for the phrase "perfectly safe" than the one I use.
"She spilled the coffee, McDonald's did not."
McDonald's heated it to over 180 degrees, possibly much higher, given the pressure it was kept under. Not the customer.
And I'm not sure what universe you live in where 180 degrees is "well short of the boiling point", maybe one where Vonnegut's Ice-9 is commonplace, but here on Planet Earth the boiling point is 212 degrees at sea level, and lower at higher altitudes, so I'd say 180 degrees is pretty close to boiling.
But they do such a good job of it themselves.
It's cerainly a great film. Problem is, it cam out in 2002.
Not forgotten. Bloom had a broken rib or something. When they took it in to post-production, Jacksone asked them to animate the horse-mounting, and that's what WETA came up with.
While we're on the subject, does anyone know if Deb testing is 2.6 friendly? I assume it is, but just looking to see what the experiences are of the people who've played with it already.
I actually think this is a good idea, but it would have to be accompanied by an increase in mod points for each moderator.
Why?
Well, at only 5 moderator points, people would be reluctant to further mod up a post that has already gone up one, knowing that their moderation will only be half as effective. Once a post gets to +2, they'll be even more reluctant, realizing that it will take 4 moderations to push it up a point. And so on.
In order to overcome that reluctance, people would need more mod points.
Alternately, and now that I think of it, this might be an even better solution, you could fractionalize the mod points. For instance, if someone mods a post that is already +2, then they only lose 1/4 point instead of 1 point.
And the only product that its vendor has threatened to sue people for not buying, even thought the product isn't available yet.
While I agree with many that Duke Nuke'em Forever, and Doom III, must be on the list of this year's Best Vaporware, and disagree the Longhorn should be on it since Longhorn wasn't promised for this year, the absolute number 1 piece of vaporware for the must be:
SCO License for IP in Linux
I mean, come on. SCO hasn't only promised repeatedly that it would be *required* for businesses running Linux, but they've threatened to *sue* any Linux using business that didn't buy one.
Not only has the license not materialized, they're *still* threatening to sue someone who doesn't buy it within 90 days. Yep, you read that right, they're threatening to sue someone who hasn't bought a license that they don't sell. Oh, they won't say who it will be yet either. Vaporsuit, vaporinfringement, vaporinfringer, vaporlicense: VAPORWARE!
The absolute King of Vapor for the year 2003. No contest.
Actually, there are lots of companies that don't bother to register their copyrights until they need them for court. For instance, the copyrights IBM alleges that SCO violated weren't registered until August 2003.
Given that smaller companies may be more likely to lose the materials they need to register copyrights later, we may see more outcomes like this if the individuals involved are persistent in their demands that companies claiing rights in such projects back it up with evidence.
"Roland, unable to find documentation establishing a copyright on the MT-32's ROM, has yielded to the project and allowed distribution of the emulator to continue."
That wouldn't stop SCO. I mean, at this point, can you really imagine the following sentence appearing anywhere:
SCO unable to find any code in Linux that matches code in Unixware or System V, has yielded to IBM and the Linux community and will no longer threaten Linux users with suing. "We goofed," Darl McBride, SCO CEO, admitted. "Sorry about that guys. No hard feelings, right?"
Cool, I didn't know about that one. Thanks.
Amanda Peet in blonde wig.