>And guess what. I'm NEVER sick. No headcolds, no flus, no coughs, no phlegm. I'm not allergic to peanuts or other household items because my body is bored (it's just a theory).
Please, please, please stop repeating that "your immune system is fragile/angry because Mommy and Daddy didn't love you enough to let you crawl on the dirty kitchen floor" BULLSHIT. Your personal health history is just one data point. Just because you lived like a pig as a child and you now have very few health problems doesn't mean that theory applies to everyone.
I grew up exposed to plenty of mud, dirt, animals and hay. Guess what? I am allergic to nearly everything that my asthma doctor has tested me for. Trees, pollen, animal dander, etc. I also take medications every day to keep my asthma in check. Why didn't the mud and dust and the hay loft impart a Superman-like immune system to me? Because your theory is BULLSHIT. I know why I have the health problems that I have: genetics. I inherited these "features".
Another data point for your "clean kids are sick kids" theory: While I am alllergic to just about everything and I take Advair morning and night to keep my bronchii happy, my brother has none of these issues. We grew up in the same house, exposed to the same mud, wood smoke, hay, grass, etc. Why am I allergic to a great number of things when my brother (just a few years younger than me) is allergic to nothing and had never had a problem breathing in his life? Explain that one to me... The answer is genetics, not exposure to mud.
>Compared to my college roommate, who grew up in what sounded nothing less than a clean room, who was sick when the weather changed. HAD to have the bottom bunk because of random nose bleeds in the middle of the night.
Your college roommate probably grew up in a "clean room" because his parents found out early in his life that he had certain health problems and made adjustments to his living conditions to minimize his symptoms. Did he grow up without carpeting in his bedroom? No stuffed animals? No pets in the house? Did he have to wash his hands after petting the neighbor's cat? Was he told to stay out of the hay loft? These are most likely reactions to his health problems and definitely not the cause of them. He lived in a "clean room" because it was one of the ways to minimize his symptoms.
I am very glad that you have excellent health. But please stop spreading that "clean kids will have weak immune systems" myth. Thank you.
>Nobody rejects mail because there is no SPF record. Obviously you have no idea how it works. Please read up on the subject before commenting next time.
Yes, organizations *do* reject email when a valid SPF record does not exist. There is a large "educational institution" in the Milwaukee area that completely stopped accepting email from my employer because we did not have an SPF record. Not simply "marked as spam", they completely stopped accepting email we were sending.
>Forced air will dry you into a raisin. It is December — do you notice, how dry your lips are in the morning?
I'm sorry but I'm going to have to call bullshit on your comment. You implied that running hot water through cast iron radiators will result in a comfortable house but using a forced air system (let's say it uses natural gas) dries out your lips. Please provide some details, math and/or science to back up your claim. If you use hot water to heat the house to 70 degrees, how can the relative humidity in the house be any different than when you heat the house to 70 using a forced air furnace (assume the furnace is a high efficiency model that has its own air intake and exhaust pipes).
I don't see how using those two different heating methods can result in different relative humidity levels at the same indoor temperature.
>There just isn't any point to get a draft n 2.0 product months before the final is released.
Holy shit! You mean I just wasted over a hundred thousand dollars on the 230 Cisco 1142 access points that I purchased and installed over the last couple of months? Why didn't someone warn me?;^)
>Also this thing is capable of 300mbits at 2.4ghz, while most of the new Intel cards are capable of 450mbits at 2.4ghz and 5.8ghz.
Unless you live in an area with no wireless neighbors, getting the 40-MHz wide channels working in the 2.4GHz spectrum is going to be a challenge. Those 40-MHz wide channels occupy either Ch 1 and 6 or 6 and 11. Even Cisco recommends not using the 40MHz-wide stuff in the 2.4 spectrum.
And of course, if you don't want wireless N or Gb Ethernet ports, you shouldn't spend extra money for an N router
Actually, 802.11n access points will give 802.11g clients better coverage than an 802.11g access point will. So, buying the 802.11n router even when you have 100% 802.11g clients today is not a total waste.
>The difference between 54 megabits and 600 megabits is extraordinary,
Where are you getting the 600 megabits figure from? To the best of my knowledge, 802.11n connections using 40MHz-wide channels peak-out at 300Mb/sec. Are you quoting the "marketing" numbers where you can get 600Mb/sec if you have 40MHz-wide connections going in both the 2.4 spectrum and the 5GHz spectrum?
>CRAPPY N routers kill B/G routes withing range. a real N router that has a 3rd radio that operates in the 5ghz band does not affect any of the B/G routers around at all.
Third radio? What the freak are you talking about? Some routers may support 802.11n in both the 2.4GHz spectrum and the 5GHz spectrum but that doesn't involve a "third radio". Also, what routers have you seen that "kill" existing 802.11b/g hardware?
>Someone brought their kid to the opening weekend showing of 300. I'll let you guess which scene the mom ended up taking her child out at (hint: it was early on)
"This will not be over quickly. You will not enjoy this. I'm not your King."
Fantastic Lad, thank you for a well-written, insightful post. Comments like yours are all too rare on Slashdot. I will incorporate your advice to consider *all* factors into my efforts to get this health problem under control.
If it was possible, you'd get a +1, Insightful from me.
Then the pharm. companies create a drug and market it to every single person in the world that has ever had their leg move.
I hate to burst your bubble but Requip was not created to treat RLS. Requip is a Parkinson's medication that existed before GSK decided to run the cutesy RLS commercials on TV.
One more thing, I would not advise telling anyone that your RLS medications don't work on you. Often doctors use the failure of medication to work as an indicative of a hyperchondriac who does not actually have the real disease.
The doctor only needs to look at the results of the two sleep studies I participated in to determine that I am not a hypochondriac. The limb movements while I was asleep and the frequent changes in sleep "stage" are graphed very clearly in the summary reports. It would be very difficult for me to fake those symptoms while I was asleep. How does reporting the effectiveness of a particular medication make me a hypochondriac?
Maybe not, but it sure as hell gave wet dreams to the marketing people over at "Drugs Are Us". --Take an existing condition, blow it all out of whack and convince the easily convinced that they've 'got' it,
I agree with your point about marketing Requip on TV as a treatment for RLS. It's clearly a push to get patients with RLS symptoms to ask their doctor about Requip (and not other Parkinson's medications which could be just as effective in the treatment of RLS).
Heck, when I focus my attention on my own legs, they also start to tingle in an irritating way until I move them.
Do your legs move at night so much that they interfere with your sleep? Have your leg movements been measured during a sleep study? There is a difference between "mah leg appears to be a-tinglin while I watch Stargate SG-1" and the condition where limb movements interfere with a person's sleep.
--I met a copy editor who works in the pharmaceutical industry, and she explained to me that everybody in her line of work is desperate right now because there's nothing to sell; not like the good old days when that penis-hardening medication came out. With house payments to make and a family to care for, she'd sell any kind of snake oil to get by. I have no doubt whatsoever that RLS is mostly bullshit pushed by non-believers even by the guys selling the drugs.
I'm not sure I heard you correctly. Did you say that Restless Leg Syndrome is mostly bullshit? I guess I need to fly you to Milwaukee and have you meet with the sleep specialist who has reviewed the results of both of my sleep studies. She can explain the charts and scores to you so you can have a better understanding of what is going on while I sleep. I assure you, limb movements in the middle of the night which cause me to shift from one sleep "stage" to another sleep "stage" are not bullshit. It's all there in black-and-white. Think of it like waking-up 22 times per hour all night long. Picture how exhausted you would feel the next day. There is very little bullshit involved.
Still, I wish you good luck in solving your problem. I don't mean to seem disrespectful, but I am curious. . . Have you looked at the obvious stuff? --Like getting a job which you love, doing lots of exercise outdoors for the fun of it, eating properly and generally diving into the work of cleaning out all the false automatic crap from the machine of your mind?
Aren't you getting back to the "placebo effect"? Are you suggesting that this chemical imbalance deep in my brain that triggers these limb movements can be fixed by thinking happy thoughts? That's an interesting approach. I will mention this to my sleep doctor the next time I meet with her. I can tell her that anyone who spends the night at the hospital for a sleep study and doesn't have sleep apnea can be cured by just eating better and get more fresh air. I will probably reduce her patient load by 50% or greater.
Just because you had not heard of RLS before the cutesy TV commercial does not mean it is not a legitimate health problem. You were close to the target earlier when you said that you knew someone "in the industry" who said they pharm companies are desperate to sell drugs to anyone. Yes, I agree with that point. Some clever marketing person found a *disease* like RLS and said "Hey, we have a drug in our portfolio that can be used to treat that disease! Let's run some cutesy ads on TV!" Have you noticed that the RLS commercials *only* mention Requip (manufactured by GlaxoSmithKline) but the ads do not mention Mirapex (another Parkinson's drug that could help RLS patients which is manufactured by Boehringer Ingelheim)? Those TV ads are meant to sell more Requip, not to help people dealing with RLS.
Part of me wishes that GlaxoSmithKline had never run those damn ads on TV. Those ads have cause more problems that they have helped. Good sleep docs already know about the various medications that can be used to help people who are d
But if you are measuring a drug's effect to cure something like say Restless Leg Syndrome, then surprise surprise the placebos work WONDERS.
I *knew* some asshole in this discussion would have to mention Restless Leg Syndrome (RLS). No, RLS is not a "designer disease" made-up by drug companies to sell more Requip. I have RLS and have tried quite a few different medications to control it. Before you reply with "But, but, but, RLS didn't exist before 2003", fire-up your favorite search engine and do a little research. There may not have been RLS-related TV commercials but RLS has definitely affected people for quite a long time.
I have tried more than a half-dozen medications to control the RLS symptoms. Some of them are not exactly cheap. The fact that they do not control the RLS symptoms shoots a hole in your "surprise surprise the placebos work WONDERS" theory.
The subsequent dosages (which included increasing the # of pills) had ZERO effect on pain levels.
You may want to google for "opiod tolerance". I know nothing about your medical history other than you mentioned pain killers and decreased effect. It's possible that your brain became desensitized to those pain killers.
Sadly, the vulnerability has nothing to do with your home network or your single Linksys wireless router. OTAP is a feature on the LWAPP (now CAPWAP) wireless controllers from Cisco that is used when installing new access points.
>(By the way, I don't see any information saying RSA SecurID only lets you use the token once. Sure it changes every 60 seconds, so that's as good as "once", but if two people happened to be racing to type in the same code at the same time, I don't see anything saying it would deny access.)
That feature is set on the RSA server. The first device to present your username and passcode gets the green light. The second device (VPN appliance, webserver, whatever) to present that same username and passcode gets a red light, even if that passcode is still valid.
>I do not think so, even for a fraction of a second 10,000 volt will kill you.
Ok, run the numbers for us. What value are you going to use for the resistance of a human standing on dry ground wearing boots? Assume that my hand is not gloved and makes direct contact with the 10,000 volt spark plug cable. Please let me know what you come up with for I, the current through the human.
>Open circuit they may produce 12 kV. But they're capable of supplying very little current, so you certainly didn't get a sustained 12 kV across your body. It might be more accurate to say "12000 volts will kill you unless the source's internal resistance is very high", but "high voltage is dangerous" is a pretty good rule of thumb.
So if I measured the electrical potential at the end of a spark plug cable, the potential will be 12,000 volts (or greater). The parent post that I replied to said "12,000 volts will not only kill you". I am saying that he is wrong. It is possible to make contact with a 12,000 volt potential and not be killed. Nothing more than that. The parent did not mention the electrical resistance/conductivity of my flesh in his post.
During one episode of "World's Toughest Fixes", host Sean Riley came in direct contact with an overhead power line that was live and had an electical potential greater than 100,000 volts (I don't remember the exact voltage). Sean is certainly still alive to tell the tale. Now right away, people are clicking the "Reply" button and getting ready to type "but that's because there was no current flowing through him!". Blanket statements like "12,000 volts will not only kill you" are dangerous and not true for one hundred percent of the cases.
>In realty, it is watts X time = joules that goes through your body that kills you. In short, the amount of energy going through your body in a relative small amount of time.
1. I was working on a car, not in a real estate office.
2. The parent to my post said nothing about watts, joules, amps or anything else. He said "12,000 volts will not only kill you". I have come in contact with an electrical potential greater than 12,000 volts and am still alive to tell the tale. Therefore I am refuting his claim.
I gotta call a little bullshit on this one. Back in my high school days, I used to mess around under the hoods of crappy cars to keep them running. I got zapped by "leaky" spark plug wires more than a few times. Automotive ignition systems (even 25 years ago) ran hotter than 12,000v and I am still alive to tell the tale.
Slashdot Mirror
>And it doesn't have parasites in it either.
Even the "cleanest" tap water can sometimes harbor nasty things:
http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/ss189
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milwaukee_Cryptosporidium_outbreak
>And guess what. I'm NEVER sick. No headcolds, no flus, no coughs, no phlegm. I'm not allergic to peanuts or other household items because my body is bored (it's just a theory).
Please, please, please stop repeating that "your immune system is fragile/angry because Mommy and Daddy didn't love you enough to let you crawl on the dirty kitchen floor" BULLSHIT. Your personal health history is just one data point. Just because you lived like a pig as a child and you now have very few health problems doesn't mean that theory applies to everyone.
I grew up exposed to plenty of mud, dirt, animals and hay. Guess what? I am allergic to nearly everything that my asthma doctor has tested me for. Trees, pollen, animal dander, etc. I also take medications every day to keep my asthma in check. Why didn't the mud and dust and the hay loft impart a Superman-like immune system to me? Because your theory is BULLSHIT. I know why I have the health problems that I have: genetics. I inherited these "features".
Another data point for your "clean kids are sick kids" theory: While I am alllergic to just about everything and I take Advair morning and night to keep my bronchii happy, my brother has none of these issues. We grew up in the same house, exposed to the same mud, wood smoke, hay, grass, etc. Why am I allergic to a great number of things when my brother (just a few years younger than me) is allergic to nothing and had never had a problem breathing in his life? Explain that one to me... The answer is genetics, not exposure to mud.
>Compared to my college roommate, who grew up in what sounded nothing less than a clean room, who was sick when the weather changed. HAD to have the bottom bunk because of random nose bleeds in the middle of the night.
Your college roommate probably grew up in a "clean room" because his parents found out early in his life that he had certain health problems and made adjustments to his living conditions to minimize his symptoms. Did he grow up without carpeting in his bedroom? No stuffed animals? No pets in the house? Did he have to wash his hands after petting the neighbor's cat? Was he told to stay out of the hay loft? These are most likely reactions to his health problems and definitely not the cause of them. He lived in a "clean room" because it was one of the ways to minimize his symptoms.
I am very glad that you have excellent health. But please stop spreading that "clean kids will have weak immune systems" myth. Thank you.
What other 10 year old OS is still supported and given new features?
I can think of an OS that just celebrated its 32nd birthday a few months ago:
http://h71000.www7.hp.com/
Yes, it's still in use - I work with it every day.
ps. Get off my lawn.
>Nobody rejects mail because there is no SPF record. Obviously you have no idea how it works. Please read up on the subject before commenting next time.
Yes, organizations *do* reject email when a valid SPF record does not exist. There is a large "educational institution" in the Milwaukee area that completely stopped accepting email from my employer because we did not have an SPF record. Not simply "marked as spam", they completely stopped accepting email we were sending.
>Forced air will dry you into a raisin. It is December — do you notice, how dry your lips are in the morning?
I'm sorry but I'm going to have to call bullshit on your comment. You implied that running hot water through cast iron radiators will result in a comfortable house but using a forced air system (let's say it uses natural gas) dries out your lips. Please provide some details, math and/or science to back up your claim. If you use hot water to heat the house to 70 degrees, how can the relative humidity in the house be any different than when you heat the house to 70 using a forced air furnace (assume the furnace is a high efficiency model that has its own air intake and exhaust pipes).
I don't see how using those two different heating methods can result in different relative humidity levels at the same indoor temperature.
three antennas is not the same as three "radios" cockbreath.
Yes, I have heard of MIMO.
>There just isn't any point to get a draft n 2.0 product months before the final is released.
;^)
Holy shit! You mean I just wasted over a hundred thousand dollars on the 230 Cisco 1142 access points that I purchased and installed over the last couple of months? Why didn't someone warn me?
>Also this thing is capable of 300mbits at 2.4ghz, while most of the new Intel cards are capable of 450mbits at 2.4ghz and 5.8ghz.
Unless you live in an area with no wireless neighbors, getting the 40-MHz wide channels working in the 2.4GHz spectrum is going to be a challenge. Those 40-MHz wide channels occupy either Ch 1 and 6 or 6 and 11. Even Cisco recommends not using the 40MHz-wide stuff in the 2.4 spectrum.
And of course, if you don't want wireless N or Gb Ethernet ports, you shouldn't spend extra money for an N router
Actually, 802.11n access points will give 802.11g clients better coverage than an 802.11g access point will. So, buying the 802.11n router even when you have 100% 802.11g clients today is not a total waste.
You think $140 is expensive? Take a look at these bad boys from Cisco: http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/ps10092/index.html
We have been buying them in ten-packs (reduces packaging) which offers a small price break. I think these APs list for around $1100 each.
>The difference between 54 megabits and 600 megabits is extraordinary,
Where are you getting the 600 megabits figure from? To the best of my knowledge, 802.11n connections using 40MHz-wide channels peak-out at 300Mb/sec. Are you quoting the "marketing" numbers where you can get 600Mb/sec if you have 40MHz-wide connections going in both the 2.4 spectrum and the 5GHz spectrum?
>CRAPPY N routers kill B/G routes withing range. a real N router that has a 3rd radio that operates in the 5ghz band does not affect any of the B/G routers around at all.
Third radio? What the freak are you talking about? Some routers may support 802.11n in both the 2.4GHz spectrum and the 5GHz spectrum but that doesn't involve a "third radio". Also, what routers have you seen that "kill" existing 802.11b/g hardware?
>Someone brought their kid to the opening weekend showing of 300. I'll let you guess which scene the mom ended up taking her child out at (hint: it was early on)
"This will not be over quickly. You will not enjoy this. I'm not your King."
How about a loop of King Leonidas shouting "THIS..IS..SPARTA!!!"?
Fantastic Lad, thank you for a well-written, insightful post. Comments like yours are all too rare on Slashdot. I will incorporate your advice to consider *all* factors into my efforts to get this health problem under control.
If it was possible, you'd get a +1, Insightful from me.
Then the pharm. companies create a drug and market it to every single person in the world that has ever had their leg move.
I hate to burst your bubble but Requip was not created to treat RLS. Requip is a Parkinson's medication that existed before GSK decided to run the cutesy RLS commercials on TV.
One more thing, I would not advise telling anyone that your RLS medications don't work on you. Often doctors use the failure of medication to work as an indicative of a hyperchondriac who does not actually have the real disease.
The doctor only needs to look at the results of the two sleep studies I participated in to determine that I am not a hypochondriac. The limb movements while I was asleep and the frequent changes in sleep "stage" are graphed very clearly in the summary reports. It would be very difficult for me to fake those symptoms while I was asleep. How does reporting the effectiveness of a particular medication make me a hypochondriac?
Maybe not, but it sure as hell gave wet dreams to the marketing people over at "Drugs Are Us". --Take an existing condition, blow it all out of whack and convince the easily convinced that they've 'got' it,
I agree with your point about marketing Requip on TV as a treatment for RLS. It's clearly a push to get patients with RLS symptoms to ask their doctor about Requip (and not other Parkinson's medications which could be just as effective in the treatment of RLS).
Heck, when I focus my attention on my own legs, they also start to tingle in an irritating way until I move them.
Do your legs move at night so much that they interfere with your sleep? Have your leg movements been measured during a sleep study? There is a difference between "mah leg appears to be a-tinglin while I watch Stargate SG-1" and the condition where limb movements interfere with a person's sleep.
--I met a copy editor who works in the pharmaceutical industry, and she explained to me that everybody in her line of work is desperate right now because there's nothing to sell; not like the good old days when that penis-hardening medication came out. With house payments to make and a family to care for, she'd sell any kind of snake oil to get by. I have no doubt whatsoever that RLS is mostly bullshit pushed by non-believers even by the guys selling the drugs.
I'm not sure I heard you correctly. Did you say that Restless Leg Syndrome is mostly bullshit? I guess I need to fly you to Milwaukee and have you meet with the sleep specialist who has reviewed the results of both of my sleep studies. She can explain the charts and scores to you so you can have a better understanding of what is going on while I sleep. I assure you, limb movements in the middle of the night which cause me to shift from one sleep "stage" to another sleep "stage" are not bullshit. It's all there in black-and-white. Think of it like waking-up 22 times per hour all night long. Picture how exhausted you would feel the next day. There is very little bullshit involved.
Still, I wish you good luck in solving your problem. I don't mean to seem disrespectful, but I am curious. . . Have you looked at the obvious stuff? --Like getting a job which you love, doing lots of exercise outdoors for the fun of it, eating properly and generally diving into the work of cleaning out all the false automatic crap from the machine of your mind?
Aren't you getting back to the "placebo effect"? Are you suggesting that this chemical imbalance deep in my brain that triggers these limb movements can be fixed by thinking happy thoughts? That's an interesting approach. I will mention this to my sleep doctor the next time I meet with her. I can tell her that anyone who spends the night at the hospital for a sleep study and doesn't have sleep apnea can be cured by just eating better and get more fresh air. I will probably reduce her patient load by 50% or greater.
Just because you had not heard of RLS before the cutesy TV commercial does not mean it is not a legitimate health problem. You were close to the target earlier when you said that you knew someone "in the industry" who said they pharm companies are desperate to sell drugs to anyone. Yes, I agree with that point. Some clever marketing person found a *disease* like RLS and said "Hey, we have a drug in our portfolio that can be used to treat that disease! Let's run some cutesy ads on TV!" Have you noticed that the RLS commercials *only* mention Requip (manufactured by GlaxoSmithKline) but the ads do not mention Mirapex (another Parkinson's drug that could help RLS patients which is manufactured by Boehringer Ingelheim)? Those TV ads are meant to sell more Requip, not to help people dealing with RLS.
Part of me wishes that GlaxoSmithKline had never run those damn ads on TV. Those ads have cause more problems that they have helped. Good sleep docs already know about the various medications that can be used to help people who are d
But if you are measuring a drug's effect to cure something like say Restless Leg Syndrome, then surprise surprise the placebos work WONDERS.
I *knew* some asshole in this discussion would have to mention Restless Leg Syndrome (RLS). No, RLS is not a "designer disease" made-up by drug companies to sell more Requip. I have RLS and have tried quite a few different medications to control it. Before you reply with "But, but, but, RLS didn't exist before 2003", fire-up your favorite search engine and do a little research. There may not have been RLS-related TV commercials but RLS has definitely affected people for quite a long time.
I have tried more than a half-dozen medications to control the RLS symptoms. Some of them are not exactly cheap. The fact that they do not control the RLS symptoms shoots a hole in your "surprise surprise the placebos work WONDERS" theory.
The subsequent dosages (which included increasing the # of pills) had ZERO effect on pain levels.
You may want to google for "opiod tolerance". I know nothing about your medical history other than you mentioned pain killers and decreased effect. It's possible that your brain became desensitized to those pain killers.
Sadly, the vulnerability has nothing to do with your home network or your single Linksys wireless router. OTAP is a feature on the LWAPP (now CAPWAP) wireless controllers from Cisco that is used when installing new access points.
>(By the way, I don't see any information saying RSA SecurID only lets you use the token once. Sure it changes every 60 seconds, so that's as good as "once", but if two people happened to be racing to type in the same code at the same time, I don't see anything saying it would deny access.)
That feature is set on the RSA server. The first device to present your username and passcode gets the green light. The second device (VPN appliance, webserver, whatever) to present that same username and passcode gets a red light, even if that passcode is still valid.
>I do not think so, even for a fraction of a second 10,000 volt will kill you.
Ok, run the numbers for us. What value are you going to use for the resistance of a human standing on dry ground wearing boots? Assume that my hand is not gloved and makes direct contact with the 10,000 volt spark plug cable. Please let me know what you come up with for I, the current through the human.
>Open circuit they may produce 12 kV. But they're capable of supplying very little current, so you certainly didn't get a sustained 12 kV across your body. It might be more accurate to say "12000 volts will kill you unless the source's internal resistance is very high", but "high voltage is dangerous" is a pretty good rule of thumb.
So if I measured the electrical potential at the end of a spark plug cable, the potential will be 12,000 volts (or greater). The parent post that I replied to said "12,000 volts will not only kill you". I am saying that he is wrong. It is possible to make contact with a 12,000 volt potential and not be killed. Nothing more than that. The parent did not mention the electrical resistance/conductivity of my flesh in his post.
During one episode of "World's Toughest Fixes", host Sean Riley came in direct contact with an overhead power line that was live and had an electical potential greater than 100,000 volts (I don't remember the exact voltage). Sean is certainly still alive to tell the tale. Now right away, people are clicking the "Reply" button and getting ready to type "but that's because there was no current flowing through him!". Blanket statements like "12,000 volts will not only kill you" are dangerous and not true for one hundred percent of the cases.
>In realty, it is watts X time = joules that goes through your body that kills you. In short, the amount of energy going through your body in a relative small amount of time.
1. I was working on a car, not in a real estate office.
2. The parent to my post said nothing about watts, joules, amps or anything else. He said "12,000 volts will not only kill you". I have come in contact with an electrical potential greater than 12,000 volts and am still alive to tell the tale. Therefore I am refuting his claim.
>12,000 volts will not only kill you,
I gotta call a little bullshit on this one. Back in my high school days, I used to mess around under the hoods of crappy cars to keep them running. I got zapped by "leaky" spark plug wires more than a few times. Automotive ignition systems (even 25 years ago) ran hotter than 12,000v and I am still alive to tell the tale.
>By the time the earth is uninhabitable, we will have terraformed Mars and Europa.
Sooooo, it sounds like you haven't read the memo that came out last week:
All these worlds are yours, except Europa. Attempt no landing there.