Yeah, that is 50 years old and should have been shut down by now. But the 2 reactors that were to replace it, are now scraped thanks to great engineering and planning.
So, isotopes you get in NA are from a derelict reactor at Chalk River.
But accelerators DO make isotopes as well. But costs more and they make shorter life isotopes. That's why many hospitals have their own linear accelerators to make small amounts of special isotopes.
While science institutions must be fully funded, they are also not very productive. There is a lot of redundancies in labs like this and Universities.
The problem is not with the actual brains, but with administration, janitorial staff, support staff. Their productivity tends to be below par. But when lab needs to make cuts, it ends up with cutting science not streamlining the non-science bits.
What labs like this need is a bottom-line no-nonsense manager to deal with the support staff and for administration to realize that the scientists are their money making assets. Scientists must be the last to go. But in reality, science is first to be cut and administration covers its asses.
Pure Communism - Soviet Russia after 1917 until 1920 or so. Lenin institutes War Communism. Fiat currency banned. Everything is to be nationalized and rationed by state. He realized it failed and return currency in early 20s.
Pure Democracy - Ancient Greece. Small townships each with own gov't. Romans overthrew them.
1. "solar wind" is basically neutral. It is composed of protons and electrons in about the same amount. That's why you see northern lights at about the same intensities are southern lights. There is no net charge leaving the sun!
2. There is no static electricity. It is a static charge. Friction produces it. Lighting goes down to ground and up into the ionosphere. Ionosphere got charged by solar winds. The charge goes into the ground. Net charge remains the same. Earth does not "charge up".
Ionosphere is charged from solar wind *heat* not from receiving some net charge from the sun. Solar wind is extremely hot, but very diffuse. It is known as a plasma. But net effect is lightning + ionosphere + solar wind (neutral) == nil charge.
3. Scientists know very well how x-rays are created. x-rays and similar do not indicate anything about any charge flows.
Scientists do not ignore electrical forces. They understand that on a large, cosmological scales, there is no difference in charged particle concentrations. Universe is basically neutral place. Is it precisely due to the strong nature of electromagnetic force that there is no "positive" or "negative" hotspots in the universe.
One of the fundamental conservation laws of physics, is that charge is neither created nor destroyed. You NEVER see an electron created from a photon. It is ALWAYS an electron/positron pair. Or neutron decay is ALWAYS into an electron and a proton and a neutral electron neutrino.
The only way the electric universe hypothesis can be taken with any grain of salt is if it is demonstrated that charge conservation does not apply in ONE (just ONE example) circumstance. Trust me, MANY scientists tried and failed over and over again. If you can demonstrate ANY circumstance where charge conservation does not apply, I'm sure you'll get a Nobel prize for your work!
no one can afford to be in the business area (software development for money) competing with the free thing (software given away for nothing)
As a software developer AND user of free software AND payer of licensing money for stuff like Qt and Microsoft MSDN, I have to say this is not true.
GPL doesn't mean for-free. Consultants get paid $$$ to add features needed. Maintenance contracts are there too. And many people would like to pay $40 to make sure their software is supported and their feedback listened to. Free-software is NOT the panacea that many would like you to believe. If upstream disappears from a project, then what? Happened already on a few free projects we use. Being one's own upstream can cost a lot more than $50.
While you are correct that free email like gmail or hotmail made paid-for mail services to customers almost obsolete, it did not make mail servers and their support obsolete. Majority of businesses run their own mail infrastructure for good reasons I will not get into here.
I would like to hear what your procedure was to handle clients that insist that they sent you a message when in fact their message got lost long before your boundary of control.
I use
grep/var/log/mail 'source@domain.com' | less
Then if there is no mail, not even mail connection attempts from their domain, then their own outgoing filter destroyed the message.
Email messages don't get 'lost'. They get destroyed on purpose. No competent admin would ever design their own internal system to destroy outgoing mail without notifying the sender that it did so.
Sorry, but SMTP is suppose to be reliable. But people, in name of fighting SPAM and similar, and due to their own laziness, made is unreliable.
If mail server at start.com is sending mail to mail server at end.com, AND that mail server replies upon receiving the mail that it was delivered via a a-OK 2xx SMTP message, then that message IS delivered.
If the receiving end proceeds to shred the emails after ACCEPTING them, that is equivalent to receiving regular mail and shredding it without opening it.
The correct procedure for unwanted emails is to scan it at SMTP stage and REJECT it with 5xx message at the DATA state of SMTP. But because of laziness, the servers accepts the mail, then scans it and trashes it without a human ever seeing it. That's where the problem is - at the receiving end, NOT delivery path.
Scan all messages as a pre-queue. The worst that can happen is all filters get busy and the server have to issue a 4xx (temporary failure, try again) message to new connections for a minute or two. Considering SMTP protocol is DESIGNED for that, I don't see a problem. The result is email can be delayed by minutes, or hours, but it is actually delivered at receiving end.
If you can do post-queue scanning, you can do pre-queue scanning! There is no more processing power needed. And use 4xx to deal with traffic spikes on slow sites.
Because it is unstable? Russians tried it way back and failed. Every time they though they were close, boom, energy lost and no reaction. The plasma with wiggle and break. It does NOT work.
From his diagrams, the device is much too simplistic to work. Russians used a similar setup. Plasma does not interact with just the outside, it interacts with itself. And that's the problem that existed since the 60s.
Tokamak researchers finally overcame this problem and a milliard of similar ones. The 60s vision of fusion of naive, to say the least. Current view is much more realistic, but general public is stuck in the 60s.
Anyway, someone lost 600k, at least, for nothing. Not only will he not get power generation, he will not even break even with raw energy.
Just like a photon doesn't "feel" electrical field but does "feel" gravity. See Einstein's General Relativity - first experimental verification. Almost a century ago.
Or take a neutron - electrically neutral yet has mass.
Then don't travel to US or through US via plane or you'll end up in Gitmo or worse. And RCMP may "find" some extra info on you to make sure that happens.
I'm a proponent of IP laws and copyright. But how the heck is counterfeiting and IP fit together?? Sorry, but it doesn't make any sense.
Counterfeiting to me means items produced as a "look a like" or in similar context, without a license to use the trademark. So, candy or tires or even CPUs can be counterfeit. But IP is not, because only counterfeit is reverse engineering. IP generally gets copied exactly. So how the heck is that counterfeit??
The only way they can apply it is if you have counterfeit CDs or DVDs or similar. But that still applies to the media marks, not the IP. The video is not counterfeit, the media is.
The motherboards are industry standard SSI form factors, so although IBM only offers Intel quad-core CPUs today, if demand for AMD chips like Barcelona returns, then IBM can off them
I didn't say it. Netcraft didn't say it. IBM and/or Tom's Hardware did!!
But from the summary, it seems that "Web 2.0 servers" are like "Web 1.0 servers" but they would need more
1. storage (for user comments)
2. I/O (less caching, more throughput)
3. processing power
But then that is just common sense. Regardless, "Web 2.0" is clearly a misused term to fullest extent possible these days. Might as well be "web enabled" and "linux" at end of the 90s.
So we are back to the good old monarchy of health insurance?? Is it back to the "who's crotch did the doctor pull you out of" with a modern twist, eh?
It is kind of moronic for people that preach that every individual has a right to live the same life. That abortions are immoral, yet the same type of right-wing will be pro-military and even pro genetic discrimination.
Either allow or even force genetic selection at embryonic stage and screen out diseases there, or don't bitch about people that get screwed over by genetic diseases. Sadly, it is generally the ignorant regarding their own genetic susceptibilities to diseases that would oppose non-discrimination bills. We all know that a lot of cancers run in families,
* breast cancer
* colon cancer
* stomach cancer
so, why not require these people die so we can pay "cheaper" insurance costs, right?
This is *exactly* why having private heath insurance for core care does NOT work. It puts capitalism back into something you can't change. It creates a cast system..
Health based on your genes is not something you can change, much. Charging different price based on people's *behaviour* and *habits* (smoking, drinking, drug usage, etc.) is one thing. Treating someone better or worse because of their genes - welcome to Gattaca.
How is genetic discrimination any different from discriminating on basis of just skin color? It is not.
Your reasoning is not correct. It is NOT a linear relationship. Punishment is to deter the crime, not to encourage it. If Enron people only stole 1 billion and were sent to jail for 30 years, that means $91,000 a day. Does that imply a thief that electronically steals $10,000 should spend an hour in jail for it? Obviously not.
Theft is theft. The music in question belongs to the copyright holders until it is licensed to or copies sold to the listeners. The listeners rightly have laws that protect them for "casual copyright infringement". But people that take other's work, like music, and distribute it for money (or for free where thousands of copies are in question), willingly and with knowledge that their acts are against the wishes of the copyright holders, should have the full force of the copyright law on their heads.
There are bad laws that infringe on most fundamental rights. Copyright law does not infringe on any of them - it is an attempt to protect the right to one's intellectual work and to have it treated just like other property. The world is moving in the direction where intellectual property will start to play a more fundamental role than physical property. When you can go to a local store and "print" yourself a tool or a car, the specs or the program for that device is intellectual property. Heck, it would be much more valuable than any single device it creates.
The current world with regards to intellectual property is where "Wild West" was in respect real property. That will change as laws are refined, punishments for breaking them get saner (as we start to understand the *real* damage of copyright theft, not imaginary numbers thrown by RIAA or pirates), and most importantly, people start to realize the value of such property.
You can get "special" burners for $1000 or so that will write to those sectors. Someone posted it on a similar discussion months ago. You can search for those types of authoring dvd writers.
It also doesn't stop pirates these can easily afford these special burners or just get a DVD shop to press real DVDs for them from the original "master" they bought for $30.
I only use BSD or similarly licensed software in my offerings as well. And generally I do give back all improvements to BSD that *make sense*. For example, a niche modification that only applies to my software doesn't really make sense to "give back" because no one wants it. But general bug fixes or features do make sense to give back.
BSD hasn't improved as fast as GPL because when someone takes bits of BSD and uses it in their software, the BSD bits are NOT their core offering. This is completely opposite of GPL software where it becomes your core.
Then of course you have BSD software that "just works" much better than any GPL software in its category - PostgreSQL. This is not to start some flamewar, but from my own *experience* it is true, Not all BSD software has a better GPL counterpart, though most do.
would apply. So it doesn't matter if you have $1,000 or $10,000,000 software theft.
Secondly, since FOSS under GPL can't be used in propitiatory offerings, the value of such software can be argued to be "cost to develop" using tools like SLOCcount.
Regardless, financial gain is enough. And ALL GPL infringements have financial gain as their motive.
Enron executives that stole hundreds of millions and deprived others off of billions, should not go to jail either, by your argument.
"Jail time for this though? He's not a dangerous person"
That's what "white collar" crime is. And, as in Enron's case, it can be as devastating or even more so than some pimp or drug dealer.
"Sorry Timmy, you can't go to college. No money. Oh, and we just lost our house because some fat cat. But it's ok, it's not like that crime affects our lives."
Of course he didn't steal because actually using one's brain to get work done is NOT actual work. Right? Only when you get calluses on your hands, is then that the only work???
Are people on stashdot living in 18th century or what?? Or maybe they just want to excuse their own behavours? (just guessing here)
It doesn't matter if someone steals a wood carving or engineering blueprint or copies software work (eg. GPL in propitiatory, copies propitiatory software) without permission or copies music without permission. All of the above require *time* on the part of the original author to create these works. It is then UP TO THE ORIGINAL AUTHOR if they want to share that for free, for money or burn it.
Taking anything without permission deprives the ORIGINAL AUTHOR of the choice of THEIR own creation.
It only makes sense that copyright law is criminal law. It's been criminal law for a long, long time in most countries I know of. Sure, music/film that was broadcast can be recorded for later playback (fair use). Software can be backed up. Heck, people even are allowed to copy between themselves. The law is not that anal.
But people that steal and try to make *money* off of other's work, this is *exactly* why criminal copyright law exists.
Or are you saying that stealing engineering blueprints is OK because if you just photocopied it, gave the originals back and gave the finger to the contractor (not paid for work done), that is OK because it is only "infringement" not theft of their time and expertise? I'm guessing most slashdot would say yes, screw the engineer, based on current moderation.
That's why you play EVE Online instead! You spend months training and ratting/trading for that mothership, then get it and in that battle on Sunday night, you lose it. I'm sure you'll remember that day for a while!
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, that is 50 years old and should have been shut down by now. But the 2 reactors that were to replace it, are now scraped thanks to great engineering and planning.
So, isotopes you get in NA are from a derelict reactor at Chalk River.
But accelerators DO make isotopes as well. But costs more and they make shorter life isotopes. That's why many hospitals have their own linear accelerators to make small amounts of special isotopes.
While science institutions must be fully funded, they are also not very productive. There is a lot of redundancies in labs like this and Universities.
The problem is not with the actual brains, but with administration, janitorial staff, support staff. Their productivity tends to be below par. But when lab needs to make cuts, it ends up with cutting science not streamlining the non-science bits.
What labs like this need is a bottom-line no-nonsense manager to deal with the support staff and for administration to realize that the scientists are their money making assets. Scientists must be the last to go. But in reality, science is first to be cut and administration covers its asses.
Pure Communism - Soviet Russia after 1917 until 1920 or so. Lenin institutes War Communism. Fiat currency banned. Everything is to be nationalized and rationed by state. He realized it failed and return currency in early 20s.
Pure Democracy - Ancient Greece. Small townships each with own gov't. Romans overthrew them.
But on a big scale, it is exactly neutral.
1. "solar wind" is basically neutral. It is composed of protons and electrons in about the same amount. That's why you see northern lights at about the same intensities are southern lights. There is no net charge leaving the sun!
2. There is no static electricity. It is a static charge. Friction produces it. Lighting goes down to ground and up into the ionosphere. Ionosphere got charged by solar winds. The charge goes into the ground. Net charge remains the same. Earth does not "charge up".
Ionosphere is charged from solar wind *heat* not from receiving some net charge from the sun. Solar wind is extremely hot, but very diffuse. It is known as a plasma. But net effect is lightning + ionosphere + solar wind (neutral) == nil charge.
3. Scientists know very well how x-rays are created. x-rays and similar do not indicate anything about any charge flows.
Scientists do not ignore electrical forces. They understand that on a large, cosmological scales, there is no difference in charged particle concentrations. Universe is basically neutral place. Is it precisely due to the strong nature of electromagnetic force that there is no "positive" or "negative" hotspots in the universe.
One of the fundamental conservation laws of physics, is that charge is neither created nor destroyed. You NEVER see an electron created from a photon. It is ALWAYS an electron/positron pair. Or neutron decay is ALWAYS into an electron and a proton and a neutral electron neutrino.
The only way the electric universe hypothesis can be taken with any grain of salt is if it is demonstrated that charge conservation does not apply in ONE (just ONE example) circumstance. Trust me, MANY scientists tried and failed over and over again. If you can demonstrate ANY circumstance where charge conservation does not apply, I'm sure you'll get a Nobel prize for your work!
Actually a part for linking from image is,
/></a>
<a href="the_link"><img src="image"
or in the great HTML 1.0 days of the yonder days,
<A HREF="the_link"><IMG SRC="image"></A>
As a software developer AND user of free software AND payer of licensing money for stuff like Qt and Microsoft MSDN, I have to say this is not true.
GPL doesn't mean for-free. Consultants get paid $$$ to add features needed. Maintenance contracts are there too. And many people would like to pay $40 to make sure their software is supported and their feedback listened to. Free-software is NOT the panacea that many would like you to believe. If upstream disappears from a project, then what?
Happened already on a few free projects we use. Being one's own upstream can cost a lot more than $50.
While you are correct that free email like gmail or hotmail made paid-for mail services to customers almost obsolete, it did not make mail servers and their support obsolete. Majority of businesses run their own mail infrastructure for good reasons I will not get into here.
I use
grep
Then if there is no mail, not even mail connection attempts from their domain, then their own outgoing filter destroyed the message.
Email messages don't get 'lost'. They get destroyed on purpose. No competent admin would ever design their own internal system to destroy outgoing mail without notifying the sender that it did so.
Sorry, but SMTP is suppose to be reliable. But people, in name of fighting SPAM and similar, and due to their own laziness, made is unreliable.
If mail server at start.com is sending mail to mail server at end.com, AND that mail server replies upon receiving the mail that it was delivered via a a-OK 2xx SMTP message, then that message IS delivered.
If the receiving end proceeds to shred the emails after ACCEPTING them, that is equivalent to receiving regular mail and shredding it without opening it.
The correct procedure for unwanted emails is to scan it at SMTP stage and REJECT it with 5xx message at the DATA state of SMTP. But because of laziness, the servers accepts the mail, then scans it and trashes it without a human ever seeing it. That's where the problem is - at the receiving end, NOT delivery path.
Scan all messages as a pre-queue. The worst that can happen is all filters get busy and the server have to issue a 4xx (temporary failure, try again) message to new connections for a minute or two. Considering SMTP protocol is DESIGNED for that, I don't see a problem. The result is email can be delayed by minutes, or hours, but it is actually delivered at receiving end.
If you can do post-queue scanning, you can do pre-queue scanning! There is no more processing power needed. And use 4xx to deal with traffic spikes on slow sites.
Because it is unstable? Russians tried it way back and failed. Every time they though they were close, boom, energy lost and no reaction. The plasma with wiggle and break. It does NOT work.
From his diagrams, the device is much too simplistic to work. Russians used a similar setup. Plasma does not interact with just the outside, it interacts with itself. And that's the problem that existed since the 60s.
Tokamak researchers finally overcame this problem and a milliard of similar ones. The 60s vision of fusion of naive, to say the least. Current view is much more realistic, but general public is stuck in the 60s.
Anyway, someone lost 600k, at least, for nothing. Not only will he not get power generation, he will not even break even with raw energy.
It is called "Material research". That part of physics needs work. That's what ITER is for.
Just like a photon doesn't "feel" electrical field but does "feel" gravity. See Einstein's General Relativity - first experimental verification. Almost a century ago.
Or take a neutron - electrically neutral yet has mass.
Then don't travel to US or through US via plane or you'll end up in Gitmo or worse. And RCMP may "find" some extra info on you to make sure that happens.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maher_Arar
True story.
I'm a proponent of IP laws and copyright. But how the heck is counterfeiting and IP fit together?? Sorry, but it doesn't make any sense.
Counterfeiting to me means items produced as a "look a like" or in similar context, without a license to use the trademark. So, candy or tires or even CPUs can be counterfeit. But IP is not, because only counterfeit is reverse engineering. IP generally gets copied exactly. So how the heck is that counterfeit??
The only way they can apply it is if you have counterfeit CDs or DVDs or similar. But that still applies to the media marks, not the IP. The video is not counterfeit, the media is.
Or is someone selling KDE has "Windows Vista"?
Counterfeit and IP don't exactly make sense.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/servers-hp-ibm,1937-3.html
I didn't say it. Netcraft didn't say it. IBM and/or Tom's Hardware did!!
WTF is TFA link?
But from the summary, it seems that "Web 2.0 servers" are like "Web 1.0 servers" but they would need more
1. storage (for user comments)
2. I/O (less caching, more throughput)
3. processing power
But then that is just common sense. Regardless, "Web 2.0" is clearly a misused term to fullest extent possible these days. Might as well be "web enabled" and "linux" at end of the 90s.
So we are back to the good old monarchy of health insurance?? Is it back to the "who's crotch did the doctor pull you out of" with a modern twist, eh?
It is kind of moronic for people that preach that every individual has a right to live the same life. That abortions are immoral, yet the same type of right-wing will be pro-military and even pro genetic discrimination.
Either allow or even force genetic selection at embryonic stage and screen out diseases there, or don't bitch about people that get screwed over by genetic diseases. Sadly, it is generally the ignorant regarding their own genetic susceptibilities to diseases that would oppose non-discrimination bills. We all know that a lot of cancers run in families,
* breast cancer
* colon cancer
* stomach cancer
so, why not require these people die so we can pay "cheaper" insurance costs, right?
This is *exactly* why having private heath insurance for core care does NOT work. It puts capitalism back into something you can't change. It creates a cast system..
Health based on your genes is not something you can change, much. Charging different price based on people's *behaviour* and *habits* (smoking, drinking, drug usage, etc.) is one thing. Treating someone better or worse because of their genes - welcome to Gattaca.
How is genetic discrimination any different from discriminating on basis of just skin color? It is not.
Your reasoning is not correct. It is NOT a linear relationship. Punishment is to deter the crime, not to encourage it. If Enron people only stole 1 billion and were sent to jail for 30 years, that means $91,000 a day. Does that imply a thief that electronically steals $10,000 should spend an hour in jail for it? Obviously not.
Theft is theft. The music in question belongs to the copyright holders until it is licensed to or copies sold to the listeners. The listeners rightly have laws that protect them for "casual copyright infringement". But people that take other's work, like music, and distribute it for money (or for free where thousands of copies are in question), willingly and with knowledge that their acts are against the wishes of the copyright holders, should have the full force of the copyright law on their heads.
There are bad laws that infringe on most fundamental rights. Copyright law does not infringe on any of them - it is an attempt to protect the right to one's intellectual work and to have it treated just like other property. The world is moving in the direction where intellectual property will start to play a more fundamental role than physical property. When you can go to a local store and "print" yourself a tool or a car, the specs or the program for that device is intellectual property. Heck, it would be much more valuable than any single device it creates.
The current world with regards to intellectual property is where "Wild West" was in respect real property. That will change as laws are refined, punishments for breaking them get saner (as we start to understand the *real* damage of copyright theft, not imaginary numbers thrown by RIAA or pirates), and most importantly, people start to realize the value of such property.
You can get "special" burners for $1000 or so that will write to those sectors. Someone posted it on a similar discussion months ago. You can search for those types of authoring dvd writers.
It also doesn't stop pirates these can easily afford these special burners or just get a DVD shop to press real DVDs for them from the original "master" they bought for $30.
I only use BSD or similarly licensed software in my offerings as well. And generally I do give back all improvements to BSD that *make sense*. For example, a niche modification that only applies to my software doesn't really make sense to "give back" because no one wants it. But general bug fixes or features do make sense to give back.
BSD hasn't improved as fast as GPL because when someone takes bits of BSD and uses it in their software, the BSD bits are NOT their core offering. This is completely opposite of GPL software where it becomes your core.
Then of course you have BSD software that "just works" much better than any GPL software in its category - PostgreSQL. This is not to start some flamewar, but from my own *experience* it is true, Not all BSD software has a better GPL counterpart, though most do.
You forgot the *one of*. Clearly,
1. financial gain
would apply. So it doesn't matter if you have $1,000 or $10,000,000 software theft.
Secondly, since FOSS under GPL can't be used in propitiatory offerings, the value of such software can be argued to be "cost to develop" using tools like SLOCcount.
Regardless, financial gain is enough. And ALL GPL infringements have financial gain as their motive.
Enron executives that stole hundreds of millions and deprived others off of billions, should not go to jail either, by your argument.
"Jail time for this though? He's not a dangerous person"
That's what "white collar" crime is. And, as in Enron's case, it can be as devastating or even more so than some pimp or drug dealer.
"Sorry Timmy, you can't go to college. No money. Oh, and we just lost our house because some fat cat. But it's ok, it's not like that crime affects our lives."
Of course he didn't steal because actually using one's brain to get work done is NOT actual work. Right? Only when you get calluses on your hands, is then that the only work???
Are people on stashdot living in 18th century or what?? Or maybe they just want to excuse their own behavours? (just guessing here)
It doesn't matter if someone steals a wood carving or engineering blueprint or copies software work (eg. GPL in propitiatory, copies propitiatory software) without permission or copies music without permission. All of the above require *time* on the part of the original author to create these works. It is then UP TO THE ORIGINAL AUTHOR if they want to share that for free, for money or burn it.
Taking anything without permission deprives the ORIGINAL AUTHOR of the choice of THEIR own creation.
It only makes sense that copyright law is criminal law. It's been criminal law for a long, long time in most countries I know of. Sure, music/film that was broadcast can be recorded for later playback (fair use). Software can be backed up. Heck, people even are allowed to copy between themselves. The law is not that anal.
But people that steal and try to make *money* off of other's work, this is *exactly* why criminal copyright law exists.
Or are you saying that stealing engineering blueprints is OK because if you just photocopied it, gave the originals back and gave the finger to the contractor (not paid for work done), that is OK because it is only "infringement" not theft of their time and expertise? I'm guessing most slashdot would say yes, screw the engineer, based on current moderation.
"windows Pc's are cheapie throw-aways. Get a virus infection, toss it and get a new one."
That's *retarded*. How about re-installing the OS???? Seems a little cheaper.
Because real engineers design cars that are "reliable".
Enough said.
That's why you play EVE Online instead! You spend months training and ratting/trading for that mothership, then get it and in that battle on Sunday night, you lose it. I'm sure you'll remember that day for a while!