Hell, since when do you need pesticides on a lawn anyway?
It depends on how groomed you want your lawn to look. Many people want a perfect manicured lawn with one single variety of grass and no ants or other bugs, for some reason.
but I don't think I've ever heard of people complaining about insects damaging their lawn
Well, grubs can play havoc with a lawn, depending on the grass type, soil conditions, etc.
I know I'm perilously close to be completely-off-the-damn-topic, but what really gets me is the fertilization of lawns. People use herbicides to keep weeds down, which kills off clover -- so grass mixes don't even contain clover anymore. Clover is a nitrogen-fixing plant; a lawn with a decent amount of clover doesn't need to be fertilized as much (if at all).
Either way, if you lick that stuff you'll taste it (bitter/burning taste) and spit it out.
You don't need to eat it, you can absorb it through your skin just playing in the grass.
It was Arthur Anderson accounting that was involved with Enron, not the Arther Anderson consulting business.
I think it's a little naive to ignore the fact that one hand washes the other. The accounting arm overlooks vairous shenanigans, because if they don't, then the consulting arm doesn't get as much business. The threat of pulling consulting contracts is a common technique to ensure you have "compliant" compliance auditors. I've seen it happen several times in the past 15 years. I think it's a little less common now than it used to be, though.
That's not what BP announced... what they announced is that this particular well will be closed permanently, and they might (read: will, if not prohibited) drill a new well a few miles away into the same reservoir.
Take some steel, rivets, and aluminum out to the hangar and just see where things end up?
The hospital or the morgue, most likely.
Actually, that sounds like a really fun time. Back in college my pals & I used to do junkyard builds once or twice a year... go salvage parts and see what we could build. We never built anything cooler than a go-cart from scrap, but one of the guys made some pretty interesting bongs.
Maybe. But Sony still has a lot of ground to make up for thinking it was acceptable to rootkit their customers (among other transgressions). It'll be a long time before I'll wish them any kind of success.
but I cant see a hard powder pill degrading when stored right
That's a significant qualifier.
How did I test? the same way they do. Pitri dishes with a growth medium and a incubator.
That's not how they test. They test by measuring the amount of active ingredient still present in the pill. IIRC, the pill must have 85% of the stated dose at time of expiry.
The reason some of those older pills may be no good to take is two-fold: 1) Less active ingredient -- after ingesting the pill, the blood concentration of the active ingredient may be below the effective concentration; 2) byproducts of the active ingredient degradation may have unwanted side effects.
I saw the same level of kill off.
Perhaps because the concentration was enough in both cases. But this may not always hold true when you're dealing with medications with narrow therapeutic windows.
Sure, you got an A on your microbio project... but there were plenty of projects I did in college labs that I got A's on that had serious methodological problems.
"I'm not looking for a relationship where the patient accepts my word as the gospel truth," RTFS?
That doesn't mean the doctor should ignore a patient's request for information. At the very least, he should have grabbed his copy of the PDR and looked it up. Ideally the doctor should know the most frequent side effects, as well as any black box warnings, for any medication they prescribe.
But if you really want to know about prescription side effects, etc, ask your pharmacist. It's their specialty -- and if there's an issue with the side effects, they can call the doctor and perhaps get the prescription changed.
I'm from Brazil and I've lived 16 years in the amazon jungle and never saw anyone but Brazilians destroying the forest, no British, no Americans let alone the fucking Chinese,
Who is buying the soybeans from the farms that used to be jungle?
Whether or not China and other countries are directly cutting down the forest, they end up sponsoring the deforestation by buying the soybeans and other crops.
The economy has continued to worsen in the previous two years and unemployment continues to rise.
Depends on how you calculate it. Unemployment is only continuing to rise because we've been using numbers that underestimate the unemployed; as we correct for that (rather, it corrects itself as more people are trying to enter the workforce), the unemployment number can be going up even though we have more people gainfully employed.
I wish we could use employment figures instead of unemployment figures, it'd be a lot more clear. Currently unemployment figures are based on something like this, with B being the "unemployment" figures:
A) Fully Employed B) Unemployed, but looking for work C) Unemployed, but not looking D) Underemployed
The current situation is that people are moving from C to B, and so the "unemployment" figure is going up, even though A (fully employed people) is also going up.
If you really want to look at video game spending as a function of general economic health, you should compare the video game market to consumer spending. Consumer spending has risen for seven months straight -- yet video game sales haven't mirrored this rise in spending. So it's likely that the cause of decreased sales is dependent on more factors than just the general state of the economy.
That said, Apple can be a competitor to Nintendo, if, and that's a big if, the bigger companies decide that. I have a hunch they won't, but I could be wrong.
I disagree that some bigger companies need to decide on the fate of Apple in portable gaming. I'm a casual gamer, and I'm stoked that in the next year or two I can get rid of my handheld gaming device and instead just play games on my smartphone.
The question is whether some bigger game developers will choose to develop games for Apple, and whether Apple will allow them on the app store... and I'd be willing to bet that both will, as there is money to be made.
What I can tell you is "Apple did it" holds about as much water explaining the decline of the videogame industry as " did it" does for explaining physical phenomena
That's not what TFA or TFS are claiming. Did you read them? They note a disproportionate decrease in sales for portable gaming, and postulate Apple's offerings as being part of that. I think in your rush to post early, you might have missed the point behind the numbers given.
Surely you see that it's possible that the Apple products have cut into the traditional portable console game sales?
I mean, you did read the summary at least, right, where they specifically mention that a large portion of the drop in video games sales was in the portable segment?
And surely you can see that Nintendo could feel that Apple's products are a threat to their business?
If you believe all the increasingly speculative articles lately, the ipad has killed videogames, netbooks, paper books, adobe, countless child laborers, and who knows what else.
Let's not generalize this. Neither I nor TFA attack Apple, there's no need for you to show up on a white horse and defend them from an attack that doesn't exist.
You, me, and just about anyone out there with any knowledge of current tech understands that the Apple products that have come out recently will compete with Nintendo for portable gaming.
So why would we see it happening more now, and not previously? These hard economic times did not begin recently; as one of the first to go, you'd think entertainment spending would have taken a bigger hit some time ago.
We had more precipitous drops in the whole economy over the past 24 months that did not see the same kind of month-over-month and YoY declines in game sales.
You get accurate results as long as the workers can choose.
You're ignoring parent's point. He gives the reason why you DON'T get accurate numbers when the workers can choose -- namely, that the workers are not able to accurately estimate risk.
You'd only get accurate numbers from free choice if (1) the choice is made with complete knowledge by the chooser and (2) the chooser makes the choice completely rationally.
Neither of these conditions are true, which is why the number is not accurate.
It doesn't matter. They make a choice that we can quantify.
Sure we can quantify the choice... but your point seems to be that the accuracy of that quantification is meaningless? Any numbers, even bad numbers, are better than no numbers?
Seriously? You advocate using numbers we know are bad just because those numbers exist?
It seems quite likely to me that normal geological processes in the last few billion years must have opened up much larger sudden releases of oil (even under the ocean) many many times.
I read an interesting analysis of this somewhere, can't find the link right now. The geologist who wrote the piece basically stated that a massive eruption requires massive pressure, and even a huge earthquake wouldn't cause an eruption as the fault and rubble would be self-sealing under those pressures.
The problem we have now is that we've protected the "fault" with structures able to withstand the high pressure, and removed any debris that could seal the hole. Even if we knocked off the well at the sea floor, the hole likely wouldn't close itself.
I don't know how spot-on the analysis was, but it made sense to my tiny mammalian brain.
Thankfully, we have an actual definition for the word "extinction" and don't have to bother with what you consider it to be.
The "most of them" he's referring to are marine species that exist only in the Gulf of Mexico, not individuals of a species. If most of them are killed off, then yes, it is an extinction event, because it is an event that leads to the extinction of many species.
It's liquid volume, not solid volume, so the correct unit is Olympic Swimming Pools per fortnight.
At 5,000 barrels per day, that's approximately 4.45 OSPs/fortnight.
This unit (OSP/fortnight) is perfect, as it expresses the current approximate volume spewed per unit time in a number easily approximated by looking at your fingers for those short on Large Number Equivalency Skill.
You're not helping your case by your use of profanity first of all. It makes you off topic also.
Profanity does not in and of itself make something offtopic.
It is clear YOU are the troll here.
Wow, you really are a five-year-old. "No I'm not, YOU are!" Do you know what a troll is?
You keep getting shot down on every so-called point you made here,
What do you mena, getting shot down? You have yet to address my points in the least. Instead you address straw men you have set up. Really, I don't give a fuck about you an clone or anyone else. My points are entirely based upon the fact that you're a threadshitter. Everytime you respond with page-length posts with irrelevant links in response to my posts, you simply reinforce my point -- that you're a threadshitter.
I honestly don't know or care about your personal situation. I ignore everything you write that has nothing to do with my point. Seriously, dude, tl;dr.
You are paranoid, dude. And narcissistic to boot. Get some help.
For companies that outsource to these places to "lower costs", you're also lowering profit, due to craptastic customer service, lack of caring, and a strict adherence to "following the script".
Do you have the numbers to back that up?
I suspect that the truth is that it actually DOES increase profit, in most cases. So what if customers are pissed off? What are they going to do, switch over to another service provider that also sends customer support offshore? The truth, I believe, is that lots of people moan and complain about "Janet" from Bangalore reading from a script, but few people actually put their money where their mouth is.
If you buy a laptop, are you checking to see where the manufacturer hosts their customer service before you buy? How about when you set up internet service? Do you find out if Verizon, your cable company, or other ISP offshores their customer support?
You may feel that companies are doing wrong because you're not happy with the customer support they provide. But really, how much are you worth to them? Are you, and others like you, worth enough to justify tripling their support costs? And if all their competitors are doing the same thing, is off-shored support really going to drive that many customers away?
Slashdot Mirror
It depends on how groomed you want your lawn to look. Many people want a perfect manicured lawn with one single variety of grass and no ants or other bugs, for some reason.
Well, grubs can play havoc with a lawn, depending on the grass type, soil conditions, etc.
I know I'm perilously close to be completely-off-the-damn-topic, but what really gets me is the fertilization of lawns. People use herbicides to keep weeds down, which kills off clover -- so grass mixes don't even contain clover anymore. Clover is a nitrogen-fixing plant; a lawn with a decent amount of clover doesn't need to be fertilized as much (if at all).
You don't need to eat it, you can absorb it through your skin just playing in the grass.
I think it's a little naive to ignore the fact that one hand washes the other. The accounting arm overlooks vairous shenanigans, because if they don't, then the consulting arm doesn't get as much business. The threat of pulling consulting contracts is a common technique to ensure you have "compliant" compliance auditors. I've seen it happen several times in the past 15 years. I think it's a little less common now than it used to be, though.
That's not what BP announced... what they announced is that this particular well will be closed permanently, and they might (read: will, if not prohibited) drill a new well a few miles away into the same reservoir.
The hospital or the morgue, most likely.
Actually, that sounds like a really fun time. Back in college my pals & I used to do junkyard builds once or twice a year... go salvage parts and see what we could build. We never built anything cooler than a go-cart from scrap, but one of the guys made some pretty interesting bongs.
Maybe. But Sony still has a lot of ground to make up for thinking it was acceptable to rootkit their customers (among other transgressions). It'll be a long time before I'll wish them any kind of success.
That's a significant qualifier.
That's not how they test. They test by measuring the amount of active ingredient still present in the pill. IIRC, the pill must have 85% of the stated dose at time of expiry.
The reason some of those older pills may be no good to take is two-fold: 1) Less active ingredient -- after ingesting the pill, the blood concentration of the active ingredient may be below the effective concentration; 2) byproducts of the active ingredient degradation may have unwanted side effects.
Perhaps because the concentration was enough in both cases. But this may not always hold true when you're dealing with medications with narrow therapeutic windows.
Sure, you got an A on your microbio project... but there were plenty of projects I did in college labs that I got A's on that had serious methodological problems.
That doesn't mean the doctor should ignore a patient's request for information. At the very least, he should have grabbed his copy of the PDR and looked it up. Ideally the doctor should know the most frequent side effects, as well as any black box warnings, for any medication they prescribe.
But if you really want to know about prescription side effects, etc, ask your pharmacist. It's their specialty -- and if there's an issue with the side effects, they can call the doctor and perhaps get the prescription changed.
You have to go back a few decades, but "No more nukes" might fit the bill.
Who is buying the soybeans from the farms that used to be jungle?
Whether or not China and other countries are directly cutting down the forest, they end up sponsoring the deforestation by buying the soybeans and other crops.
FTFY.
I was working off the current BPD figures, not the projected BPD figures from TFA.
But for the million barrels a day figure, we need to change the units.
It works out to about 2.65 OSPs/hour
See? Still fits into the I-can-count-on-my-fingers requirement.
Depends on how you calculate it. Unemployment is only continuing to rise because we've been using numbers that underestimate the unemployed; as we correct for that (rather, it corrects itself as more people are trying to enter the workforce), the unemployment number can be going up even though we have more people gainfully employed.
I wish we could use employment figures instead of unemployment figures, it'd be a lot more clear. Currently unemployment figures are based on something like this, with B being the "unemployment" figures:
A) Fully Employed
B) Unemployed, but looking for work
C) Unemployed, but not looking
D) Underemployed
The current situation is that people are moving from C to B, and so the "unemployment" figure is going up, even though A (fully employed people) is also going up.
If you really want to look at video game spending as a function of general economic health, you should compare the video game market to consumer spending. Consumer spending has risen for seven months straight -- yet video game sales haven't mirrored this rise in spending. So it's likely that the cause of decreased sales is dependent on more factors than just the general state of the economy.
I disagree that some bigger companies need to decide on the fate of Apple in portable gaming. I'm a casual gamer, and I'm stoked that in the next year or two I can get rid of my handheld gaming device and instead just play games on my smartphone.
The question is whether some bigger game developers will choose to develop games for Apple, and whether Apple will allow them on the app store... and I'd be willing to bet that both will, as there is money to be made.
That's not what TFA or TFS are claiming. Did you read them? They note a disproportionate decrease in sales for portable gaming, and postulate Apple's offerings as being part of that. I think in your rush to post early, you might have missed the point behind the numbers given.
Surely you see that it's possible that the Apple products have cut into the traditional portable console game sales?
I mean, you did read the summary at least, right, where they specifically mention that a large portion of the drop in video games sales was in the portable segment?
And surely you can see that Nintendo could feel that Apple's products are a threat to their business?
Let's not generalize this. Neither I nor TFA attack Apple, there's no need for you to show up on a white horse and defend them from an attack that doesn't exist.
You, me, and just about anyone out there with any knowledge of current tech understands that the Apple products that have come out recently will compete with Nintendo for portable gaming.
So why would we see it happening more now, and not previously? These hard economic times did not begin recently; as one of the first to go, you'd think entertainment spending would have taken a bigger hit some time ago.
Considering who the other players in the field are, why would you want them to both lose?
Would you rather Microsoft, Sony, or the nascent overlord Google win?
We had more precipitous drops in the whole economy over the past 24 months that did not see the same kind of month-over-month and YoY declines in game sales.
You're ignoring parent's point. He gives the reason why you DON'T get accurate numbers when the workers can choose -- namely, that the workers are not able to accurately estimate risk.
You'd only get accurate numbers from free choice if (1) the choice is made with complete knowledge by the chooser and (2) the chooser makes the choice completely rationally.
Neither of these conditions are true, which is why the number is not accurate.
Sure we can quantify the choice... but your point seems to be that the accuracy of that quantification is meaningless? Any numbers, even bad numbers, are better than no numbers?
Seriously? You advocate using numbers we know are bad just because those numbers exist?
I read an interesting analysis of this somewhere, can't find the link right now. The geologist who wrote the piece basically stated that a massive eruption requires massive pressure, and even a huge earthquake wouldn't cause an eruption as the fault and rubble would be self-sealing under those pressures.
The problem we have now is that we've protected the "fault" with structures able to withstand the high pressure, and removed any debris that could seal the hole. Even if we knocked off the well at the sea floor, the hole likely wouldn't close itself.
I don't know how spot-on the analysis was, but it made sense to my tiny mammalian brain.
The "most of them" he's referring to are marine species that exist only in the Gulf of Mexico, not individuals of a species. If most of them are killed off, then yes, it is an extinction event, because it is an event that leads to the extinction of many species.
It's liquid volume, not solid volume, so the correct unit is Olympic Swimming Pools per fortnight.
At 5,000 barrels per day, that's approximately 4.45 OSPs/fortnight.
This unit (OSP/fortnight) is perfect, as it expresses the current approximate volume spewed per unit time in a number easily approximated by looking at your fingers for those short on Large Number Equivalency Skill.
You cannot squeeze blood from a stone, though two birds in a bush may have a cup that runneth over.
Does that help any?
Why are you quoting other people in response to my post?
And why do you think anyone cares what you have to say?
Profanity does not in and of itself make something offtopic.
Wow, you really are a five-year-old. "No I'm not, YOU are!" Do you know what a troll is?
What do you mena, getting shot down? You have yet to address my points in the least. Instead you address straw men you have set up. Really, I don't give a fuck about you an clone or anyone else. My points are entirely based upon the fact that you're a threadshitter. Everytime you respond with page-length posts with irrelevant links in response to my posts, you simply reinforce my point -- that you're a threadshitter.
I honestly don't know or care about your personal situation. I ignore everything you write that has nothing to do with my point. Seriously, dude, tl;dr.
You are paranoid, dude. And narcissistic to boot. Get some help.
And stop threadshitting.
Do you have the numbers to back that up?
I suspect that the truth is that it actually DOES increase profit, in most cases. So what if customers are pissed off? What are they going to do, switch over to another service provider that also sends customer support offshore? The truth, I believe, is that lots of people moan and complain about "Janet" from Bangalore reading from a script, but few people actually put their money where their mouth is.
If you buy a laptop, are you checking to see where the manufacturer hosts their customer service before you buy? How about when you set up internet service? Do you find out if Verizon, your cable company, or other ISP offshores their customer support?
You may feel that companies are doing wrong because you're not happy with the customer support they provide. But really, how much are you worth to them? Are you, and others like you, worth enough to justify tripling their support costs? And if all their competitors are doing the same thing, is off-shored support really going to drive that many customers away?