Many people scream and whine about genetically modified organisms, however I think that is silly. For fairness I have worked in field.
They put one gene in cotton to get it to produce an organic pesticide (replacing millions of tons of dangerous chemicals), or a gene into corn that keeps it from being harmed by a common herbicide. Then weave it into cloth (after a bleaching process that ensures no protein is retained) or feed it to animals, and people have a cow. However, when you go to the store and buy a hybrid of cauliflower and broccoli, fruit hybrid like a plumot or tangelo and no one says a thing, cause it is "natural". These are double standards that make little sense. Who cares if the cow you are eating is cloned, once it’s cooked medium well, its parentage is of little concern. Some of the biggest transgenics experiments are going on in your large intestine right now. The bacteria that live there pick up bits and pieces of DNA from their surroundings and incorporate that into their genome, just to see if it might be useful. So if the bacteria in your gut are performing illegal research in cross species transgenics, why haven’t we been wiped out? Because most of it is harmless, the bacteria die for their mistake, and life goes on since there was 500 billion bacteria just like them living in you. As for the possibility that these transgenic genes will cause mass allergic reactions which will kill people like nerve gas, um well then it should have already happened. Bt is sprayed on organic fruits and vegetables, and the Roundup ready gene is an amplification of one of the plant’s natural genes. It is just better press to scream the sky is falling, than talk about the 2 billion people will have food and clothes, instead of starving like they would if we grew all crops organically.
Thursday, November 17, 2005
How to bargin
Most people think that bargaining is dead in our price tagged society and that is totally wrong. Yes, I wouldn’t try and bargain at the grocery store since saying “Yes I know this can of peas is 75 cents, but would you take 50 cents?” makes you sound crazy or cheap. However telling the guy at the electronics store “This TV is $750 but I can only really afford $600…?”, is different. If I sound crazy or cheap that is fine, he might say yes and the worst he can do is say no.
Now there are rules at least in my mind, if it is a big chain store and the people aren’t on commission go for blood. If it is a little mom and pop store then let them make some money that is just neighborly. You must be nice, and it will take a bit of time to get them to like you enough, so if you think you can be in and out in 20 minutes plan on an hour. However, unless you make $200+ an hour, spending a little extra time to save that much money is well worth it. What do I mean by be nice? Talk to them; make them feel important, it is hard to explain but you will know it when you see it. Offer them a deal, if they give you the discount, you will spend part of the money you saved on accessories. Yes, it eats up your savings but if it is stuff you needed anyways…? Last is it somewhat risky to come out and ask for a deal, word the request such that is their idea. Such as “I want this TV (the $750 price is understood) and these accessories (the $250 price is understood), but I only have $750, well I guess I can wait or maybe I can find the accessories online or something, hmmm.” Salesman thinks (“Well the markup is 75% and I would hate to lose the business…”) so the salesman says “Well if I give you a 25% discount on everything then you can buy it all now…” This way everyone wins(ish).
Now there are rules at least in my mind, if it is a big chain store and the people aren’t on commission go for blood. If it is a little mom and pop store then let them make some money that is just neighborly. You must be nice, and it will take a bit of time to get them to like you enough, so if you think you can be in and out in 20 minutes plan on an hour. However, unless you make $200+ an hour, spending a little extra time to save that much money is well worth it. What do I mean by be nice? Talk to them; make them feel important, it is hard to explain but you will know it when you see it. Offer them a deal, if they give you the discount, you will spend part of the money you saved on accessories. Yes, it eats up your savings but if it is stuff you needed anyways…? Last is it somewhat risky to come out and ask for a deal, word the request such that is their idea. Such as “I want this TV (the $750 price is understood) and these accessories (the $250 price is understood), but I only have $750, well I guess I can wait or maybe I can find the accessories online or something, hmmm.” Salesman thinks (“Well the markup is 75% and I would hate to lose the business…”) so the salesman says “Well if I give you a 25% discount on everything then you can buy it all now…” This way everyone wins(ish).
Saturday, November 12, 2005
Random facts about risk
About 14 people a year are killed world wide by sharks
About 150 people a year are killed world wide by falling coconuts
By that metric being in the water is safer that being on the beach!
About 100 people are killed every year in the USA by lightening strikes.
(However, more than a 1,000 are struck and survive, which is amazing because the average lightening bolt delivers more energy than a large nuclear power plant over the same time interval.)
About 291 people are killed in the USA by prion diseases (like CJD) every year.
(The cause of most prion disease is a natural mutation in a brain protein. To date no one on record in the USA has contracted and died of a prion disease they got from eating American beef; however several people a year die of prion disease contracted by eating squirrel brains.)
A few more sobering statistics
About 14,000 people a year are killed in the USA by HIV/AIDS
About 36,000 people a year are killed in the USA by Influenza
About 40,000 people a year are killed in the USA by car accidents
(Compare this to less than ~300 people killed per year in the USA by commercial plane crashes.)
About 54,000 people a year are killed in the USA by Alzheimer’s
About 553,000 people a year are killed in the USA by cancer
About 931,000 people a year are killed in the USA by Cardiovascular Disease
About 2,500,000 people a year die in the USA alone
Lest that make you sad, 4,300,000 people a year a born in the USA alone!
About 150 people a year are killed world wide by falling coconuts
By that metric being in the water is safer that being on the beach!
About 100 people are killed every year in the USA by lightening strikes.
(However, more than a 1,000 are struck and survive, which is amazing because the average lightening bolt delivers more energy than a large nuclear power plant over the same time interval.)
About 291 people are killed in the USA by prion diseases (like CJD) every year.
(The cause of most prion disease is a natural mutation in a brain protein. To date no one on record in the USA has contracted and died of a prion disease they got from eating American beef; however several people a year die of prion disease contracted by eating squirrel brains.)
A few more sobering statistics
About 14,000 people a year are killed in the USA by HIV/AIDS
About 36,000 people a year are killed in the USA by Influenza
About 40,000 people a year are killed in the USA by car accidents
(Compare this to less than ~300 people killed per year in the USA by commercial plane crashes.)
About 54,000 people a year are killed in the USA by Alzheimer’s
About 553,000 people a year are killed in the USA by cancer
About 931,000 people a year are killed in the USA by Cardiovascular Disease
About 2,500,000 people a year die in the USA alone
Lest that make you sad, 4,300,000 people a year a born in the USA alone!
Tuesday, November 08, 2005
Riots in France and torture in America
So the riots in France have continued night after night for almost 2 weeks now. My question is what do the rioters do during the day? I mean do they spend the day "preparing" for the next nights rioting, and if so how? It seems like if the riots aren’t day and night then they are rioting because they know they can’t be stopped. I am sure that is not news, but it puts America’s problems in perspective. Doesn’t it?
Now then the president (after the CIA got caught running secret prisons) says that America doesn’t torture. That is a lie, of course we torture, every country tortures. A successful interrogation requires torture (why else would the person talk, the interrogators charming personality?) but before you freak lets consider what constitutes torture.
The definition of torture is the infliction of severe physical or psychological pain or grief as an expression of cruelty, a means of intimidation, deterrent, revenge or punishment, or as a tool for the extraction of information or confessions.
So now that you are aware of the meaning of torture, you see that not all torture involves bamboo and thumbscrews. The police torture suspects all the time that is not a secret, they just don't beat them to a pulp, they don't need too. Torture abounds in society, our civilized society just has gotten better at it, there is no need to roast people alive any more. Pain is something the mind and the body can be taught to endure psychological torture on the other hand is much less noticeable and much harder to endure, so it works much better.
Banning torture is a useless gesture, it is already illegal. I am not saying torture is right, I am saying that it is part of human nature, and as long as there are people who don't just offer up information when requested, torture isn’t going to go away.
Believe me America is taking the high road here, the prisoners at camp X-ray are calling the Red Cross to complaint about the food, or that the prayer rugs are too small. If we weren’t they wouldn’t be getting food, or sleep or medical treatment, they would be locked in a cage that’s too small to stand or lie down, in total darkness, except when they were being beaten like a piñata, and everyday they would be told was their last on this earth. See the difference? That isn’t even bad torture that is relatively benign as that sort of thing goes. (I didn’t make that example up, that is a heavily edited for graphic content version of a story told to me by a former Vietnam POW.)
Now then the president (after the CIA got caught running secret prisons) says that America doesn’t torture. That is a lie, of course we torture, every country tortures. A successful interrogation requires torture (why else would the person talk, the interrogators charming personality?) but before you freak lets consider what constitutes torture.
The definition of torture is the infliction of severe physical or psychological pain or grief as an expression of cruelty, a means of intimidation, deterrent, revenge or punishment, or as a tool for the extraction of information or confessions.
So now that you are aware of the meaning of torture, you see that not all torture involves bamboo and thumbscrews. The police torture suspects all the time that is not a secret, they just don't beat them to a pulp, they don't need too. Torture abounds in society, our civilized society just has gotten better at it, there is no need to roast people alive any more. Pain is something the mind and the body can be taught to endure psychological torture on the other hand is much less noticeable and much harder to endure, so it works much better.
Banning torture is a useless gesture, it is already illegal. I am not saying torture is right, I am saying that it is part of human nature, and as long as there are people who don't just offer up information when requested, torture isn’t going to go away.
Believe me America is taking the high road here, the prisoners at camp X-ray are calling the Red Cross to complaint about the food, or that the prayer rugs are too small. If we weren’t they wouldn’t be getting food, or sleep or medical treatment, they would be locked in a cage that’s too small to stand or lie down, in total darkness, except when they were being beaten like a piñata, and everyday they would be told was their last on this earth. See the difference? That isn’t even bad torture that is relatively benign as that sort of thing goes. (I didn’t make that example up, that is a heavily edited for graphic content version of a story told to me by a former Vietnam POW.)
Monday, November 07, 2005
Category 7
I am not sure when it is on but they’ve been advertising a show called Category 7: The end of the world. They show a clip of Paris being destroyed and everything. Ok here is the deal it is physically impossible to get a hurricane above Cat 5. Why? Because reach Cat 5 just to reach Cat 5 requires near prefect conditions, then once they do they can’t keep up with their own energy needs so they weaken and go back to a Cat 4 or 3. Now if it was possible for a storm to keep growing once it reached Cat 5 it would be so large that it would pull its self apart because to keep the core spinning would mean the outside spiral arms would have to move so fast they would shear off.
If we pretend that a hurricane could reach Cat 7 once it touches land it starts to lose energy since the energy is taken from the ocean and to get Paris would require a big piece to be over land (Portugal, Spain, the rest of France, North Africa, little things.) If we keep pretending that could happen then the storm would have to get unhindered above the 48th parallel which on the other side of the Atlantic is Newfoundland, yes like Vikings and reindeer. But past about Virginia there isn’t enough energy in the ocean to keep the storm going. Now if we keepppp pretending that a Cat 7 hurricane could do all of these things, to reach Paris would require the storm to go against the earth rotation and that my friends in impossible, and if it were possible we would have bigger problems cause one of the few things that could actually destroy the earth much like it destroys car transmissions is shifting into reverse going full speed. The sudden reversal of the earth’s rotation would shatter the crust and cause massive deformation of the semi-liquid mantle which would spurt out and maybe calve us a new moon. Unfortunately no one would survive to see the double moon rise, so the view would be largely wasted. You need not worry; to reverse the earth’s rotation would take an unimaginable amount of energy. You also need not worry about a Category 7 hurricane either.
But if you need to worry about something there is a caldera volcano (a so called supervolcano) under Yellowstone Park, that when it erupts will blanket most the Midwest in several meters of ash, trigger a short lived nuclear winter, cause a sever drop in global temperature that could last a decade and the eruption is several thousand years overdue. I wouldn’t panic yet since in geological time even a couple thousand years is a blink of an eye, so the average human’s life time isn’t even worth measuring.
If we pretend that a hurricane could reach Cat 7 once it touches land it starts to lose energy since the energy is taken from the ocean and to get Paris would require a big piece to be over land (Portugal, Spain, the rest of France, North Africa, little things.) If we keep pretending that could happen then the storm would have to get unhindered above the 48th parallel which on the other side of the Atlantic is Newfoundland, yes like Vikings and reindeer. But past about Virginia there isn’t enough energy in the ocean to keep the storm going. Now if we keepppp pretending that a Cat 7 hurricane could do all of these things, to reach Paris would require the storm to go against the earth rotation and that my friends in impossible, and if it were possible we would have bigger problems cause one of the few things that could actually destroy the earth much like it destroys car transmissions is shifting into reverse going full speed. The sudden reversal of the earth’s rotation would shatter the crust and cause massive deformation of the semi-liquid mantle which would spurt out and maybe calve us a new moon. Unfortunately no one would survive to see the double moon rise, so the view would be largely wasted. You need not worry; to reverse the earth’s rotation would take an unimaginable amount of energy. You also need not worry about a Category 7 hurricane either.
But if you need to worry about something there is a caldera volcano (a so called supervolcano) under Yellowstone Park, that when it erupts will blanket most the Midwest in several meters of ash, trigger a short lived nuclear winter, cause a sever drop in global temperature that could last a decade and the eruption is several thousand years overdue. I wouldn’t panic yet since in geological time even a couple thousand years is a blink of an eye, so the average human’s life time isn’t even worth measuring.
High tech toys shouldn't buy this holiday season and why
An HDTV
The whole HDTV is a disaster, the 1080p (which is the top of the top) are just now starting to come out on the mass market, this means that the 720p and 1080i are on their way out since they were only stepping stones to getting to full HDTV resolution. Plus most HDTVs are 16X9 but most content is still the standard 4X3 so you end up with less TV for your money. Then there is the debate about how HDTV signal is sent, is it Component 3 channel, Component 5 channel, DVI or HDMI? Till they decide on a standard if you pick wrong then you get to buy a new TV in a few years anyways. Wait till at least the end of 2006 and you will be much happier.
WiFi equipment that uses pre 802.11N
Again this is a standard thing. Each company is making equipment with the standard they hope will get adopted. Now this means that your equipment might not work on your buddy's pre-N network. Plus if life has taught us anything it is best that no one wins, so the N standard will be a compromise. If this happens and your equipment isn't upgradeable your shiny new pre-N router and cards are junk! I suggest getting a 802.11g router with MIMO. You won't have the best but you will be pretty damn close, and you card will connect you to most WiFi networks for many years to come!
An Ipod Nano
Never buy the 1st generation of a new product that works with new technology. You will pay too much and the chances it will get recalled are much better. If you want proof, the Nano 4 gig costs as much as the regular 20/30 gig and has a less battery life! I am not saying you shouldn't buy an IPod, I am saying let some else's $200 to $300 work out the bugs and drive the price of memory down. As a side note Samsung one of the top memory chip makers announced this week they have a memory chip that can hold 32 GigaBytes! So 4 GigaBytes will be old hat soon.
The whole HDTV is a disaster, the 1080p (which is the top of the top) are just now starting to come out on the mass market, this means that the 720p and 1080i are on their way out since they were only stepping stones to getting to full HDTV resolution. Plus most HDTVs are 16X9 but most content is still the standard 4X3 so you end up with less TV for your money. Then there is the debate about how HDTV signal is sent, is it Component 3 channel, Component 5 channel, DVI or HDMI? Till they decide on a standard if you pick wrong then you get to buy a new TV in a few years anyways. Wait till at least the end of 2006 and you will be much happier.
WiFi equipment that uses pre 802.11N
Again this is a standard thing. Each company is making equipment with the standard they hope will get adopted. Now this means that your equipment might not work on your buddy's pre-N network. Plus if life has taught us anything it is best that no one wins, so the N standard will be a compromise. If this happens and your equipment isn't upgradeable your shiny new pre-N router and cards are junk! I suggest getting a 802.11g router with MIMO. You won't have the best but you will be pretty damn close, and you card will connect you to most WiFi networks for many years to come!
An Ipod Nano
Never buy the 1st generation of a new product that works with new technology. You will pay too much and the chances it will get recalled are much better. If you want proof, the Nano 4 gig costs as much as the regular 20/30 gig and has a less battery life! I am not saying you shouldn't buy an IPod, I am saying let some else's $200 to $300 work out the bugs and drive the price of memory down. As a side note Samsung one of the top memory chip makers announced this week they have a memory chip that can hold 32 GigaBytes! So 4 GigaBytes will be old hat soon.
Sunday, November 06, 2005
America the chunky: Fat kids and portion sizes
Ok I will be honest my nickname as kid was not "beanpole", and if it was it would have been for the same reason biker gangs have so many guys named "Tiny". With that disclaimer out of the way I figured out why kids today are so fat and while it has a lot to do with them sitting on their butts in front of the TV all day but there is something else that isn’t their fault. I saw an ad for Healthy Choice TV Dinners, where the idiot father was forced to take care of the kids for the day, and the only thing he did right was feed them a Health Choice meal for dinner. Let’s analyze the commercial the dad was probably 190 lbs and his daughter was say 45 lbs and son 35lbs, but they all go the same size portion. Ok that would be fine, since the kids would eat till they are and then the Dad would finish their meals, but what is the mantra of so many parents? It involves kids in other countries not getting food so you better eat all yours. The USDA is partly at fault for fat kids, but I doubt they will admit it, but it evidence is irrefutable. 2000 calories a day is a guideline, not what every one needs! We have become a nation of one size fits all. In fact the average woman needs ~2000 calories, the average man needs ~2,800 and kids it varies too much to put a number to it. However feeding your 6 year old kid 2,000 calories a day is like you eating ~4,500 or more and you bet your stretchy pants you’ll gain weight. Let your kids eat till they are full but no more, then if they are hungry between meals don’t starve them offer them carrots or grapes, soon their metabolism will adjust and they will eat the calories they need to make their metabolic goals.
Now before I signoff this is a message to all the women from all the men. Men require more calories on average, if you glance above you will notice it men require 1.4 times the calories of women and the bigger or more muscular your guy the more he needs up to 20,000 for the super duper fit weight lifter. I eat lunch with women a lot and I always feel bad or get dirty looks from them for eating sooooo much and I assume this happens to a lot of men. I have to eat more it is not optional, so get use to it. If a man and a woman go on the same diet and get the same amount of exercise it likely the man will lose twice the weight, since the caloric reduction is much larger for the guy and the higher muscle mass of the guy will make the exercise consume more calories. It is physiology, and therefore ladies not debatable.
I will close with a thought for women, while you seek equality in all things, the dinner table is not a place for this philosophy, since equality there, will mean you and he will wear the same size pants too. Like Chris Rock says (and look how thin he is) give the man the big piece of chicken. Here is an idea, if you want to lose weight as a couple, the man should eat the woman’s size portion and the woman should eat 3/4 of that, (portion size in America is 25% to 50% too large anyways). The pounds will melt away.
Now before I signoff this is a message to all the women from all the men. Men require more calories on average, if you glance above you will notice it men require 1.4 times the calories of women and the bigger or more muscular your guy the more he needs up to 20,000 for the super duper fit weight lifter. I eat lunch with women a lot and I always feel bad or get dirty looks from them for eating sooooo much and I assume this happens to a lot of men. I have to eat more it is not optional, so get use to it. If a man and a woman go on the same diet and get the same amount of exercise it likely the man will lose twice the weight, since the caloric reduction is much larger for the guy and the higher muscle mass of the guy will make the exercise consume more calories. It is physiology, and therefore ladies not debatable.
I will close with a thought for women, while you seek equality in all things, the dinner table is not a place for this philosophy, since equality there, will mean you and he will wear the same size pants too. Like Chris Rock says (and look how thin he is) give the man the big piece of chicken. Here is an idea, if you want to lose weight as a couple, the man should eat the woman’s size portion and the woman should eat 3/4 of that, (portion size in America is 25% to 50% too large anyways). The pounds will melt away.
Saturday, November 05, 2005
Alanis Morissette on Global Warming
I saw ad last night for a show called "Alanis Morissette explores the science behind Global Warming" on PBS. I will not dispute that it is not a good idea to burn fossil fuels at the rate we currently do, and that trees are good. However, the evidence for global warming is not all that sound since we have less than 100 years of temperature measurements, and about 30 years of high resolution weather data. (All those ice cores are kind of crappy science too, why? CO2 is soluble in water and the colder the water the more soluble it is. That “air that hasn’t seen the light of day 100,000 years” so is a prefect record of the ancient atmosphere, has been washed clean during all that time. If you squeeze ice hard enough it melts even if the temperature remains below the freezing point, (this is why you can skate on ice), so most of the CO2 can be removed by the water while rest of the gas remains largely unaltered.)
Determining long term weather trends with 30 years of data is just poor science (but makes great "news"), remember that between 1150 and 1460 there was a mini-ice age. This all happened before the Industrial Revolution, so we can’t really pin that on man’s interference, it just happened then, it went away. Weather is chaos at its finest, it is unpredictable more than a few days in advance, I cite hurricane landfall prediction as proof of this. The thing as the size of a Midwestern state but they can’t tell more than a few hours in advance what it will do. Sure NOAA thinks it will be a warm winter and they will probably be right because of El Nino, but if there wasn’t an obvious signal, they really would only be guessing.
Now whether or not you believe in global warming is immaterial, the question is should Alanis Morissette, be the person who interprets and reports on the evidence behind global warming? She clearly has an agenda, since on the commercial she said global warming is a fact. Now I did enjoy her album, Jagged Little Pill, it was wrought with emotion, and conveyed a rawness that spoke to her inner torment so it will surely to become a classic. However, it is equally clear that this woman doesn’t know what irony is, since everything she said was ironic wasn’t, it was tragic perhaps, but definitely not ironic. So I ask you this, is a woman who doesn’t know what irony is, qualified to interpret climatological data and draw conclusions? I think not, but I find it ironic that she (and the fine folks at PBS) thinks so, and by the way, that is a real example of irony.
Determining long term weather trends with 30 years of data is just poor science (but makes great "news"), remember that between 1150 and 1460 there was a mini-ice age. This all happened before the Industrial Revolution, so we can’t really pin that on man’s interference, it just happened then, it went away. Weather is chaos at its finest, it is unpredictable more than a few days in advance, I cite hurricane landfall prediction as proof of this. The thing as the size of a Midwestern state but they can’t tell more than a few hours in advance what it will do. Sure NOAA thinks it will be a warm winter and they will probably be right because of El Nino, but if there wasn’t an obvious signal, they really would only be guessing.
Now whether or not you believe in global warming is immaterial, the question is should Alanis Morissette, be the person who interprets and reports on the evidence behind global warming? She clearly has an agenda, since on the commercial she said global warming is a fact. Now I did enjoy her album, Jagged Little Pill, it was wrought with emotion, and conveyed a rawness that spoke to her inner torment so it will surely to become a classic. However, it is equally clear that this woman doesn’t know what irony is, since everything she said was ironic wasn’t, it was tragic perhaps, but definitely not ironic. So I ask you this, is a woman who doesn’t know what irony is, qualified to interpret climatological data and draw conclusions? I think not, but I find it ironic that she (and the fine folks at PBS) thinks so, and by the way, that is a real example of irony.
Thursday, November 03, 2005
Denver and pot
Well here is a conundrum, Denver just legalized marijuana with 54% in favor. The problem is that Colorado still says pot is illegal and in the “legal hierarchy” city law can’t permit something the state or Federal government is illegal. (Someone should tell Nevada this.) So, what is Denver to do? Well I have a feeling they are already doing it, since penalty for having pot in Colorado is $100 fine and no jail time.
However, the city government and conservative groups are livid that pot was legalized. They are screaming that the police will ignore the law and crack down on pot smoking. I would bet the ACLU people are beginning to prepare the defense for the first person how is arrested for doing something that is legal. (Remember getting a date with the Supreme Court takes time so it would be wise for them to plan ahead, do you think they talk call ahead seating like OutBack?)
You know the "people" in Las Vegas are pissed, they wanted to be the first to legalize pot since it would be a serious tourist draw. But they shouldn’t be, if you think about it though skiing and pot are good together, some of those people could stand to be mellowed out (You know the ones, the guys who learn to ski, have a few beers and go straight to the double black diamond with a blood red skull and crossbones slope called “Splat!”.) Plus skiing burns calories so the munchies won’t make you gain weight. Gambling and drinking (from the casinos’ point of view) are a good combo since booze makes people brave and stupid (this encourages people to do things like hitting on 20 in Blackjack cause "they felt lucky" or putting an “escort” on your business credit card when there spouse is the company accountant.) Drunks can be separated from their money very efficiently and that is goal of Vegas. (Why do you think the drinks are free if your playing?). Pot would hurt their business, since people wouldn’t gamble or shop, they would just sit in their rooms eating Cheetos and watching cartoons.
However, the city government and conservative groups are livid that pot was legalized. They are screaming that the police will ignore the law and crack down on pot smoking. I would bet the ACLU people are beginning to prepare the defense for the first person how is arrested for doing something that is legal. (Remember getting a date with the Supreme Court takes time so it would be wise for them to plan ahead, do you think they talk call ahead seating like OutBack?)
You know the "people" in Las Vegas are pissed, they wanted to be the first to legalize pot since it would be a serious tourist draw. But they shouldn’t be, if you think about it though skiing and pot are good together, some of those people could stand to be mellowed out (You know the ones, the guys who learn to ski, have a few beers and go straight to the double black diamond with a blood red skull and crossbones slope called “Splat!”.) Plus skiing burns calories so the munchies won’t make you gain weight. Gambling and drinking (from the casinos’ point of view) are a good combo since booze makes people brave and stupid (this encourages people to do things like hitting on 20 in Blackjack cause "they felt lucky" or putting an “escort” on your business credit card when there spouse is the company accountant.) Drunks can be separated from their money very efficiently and that is goal of Vegas. (Why do you think the drinks are free if your playing?). Pot would hurt their business, since people wouldn’t gamble or shop, they would just sit in their rooms eating Cheetos and watching cartoons.
The difference between scientists and engineers
I am in a branch of science that is very applied, so like engineers, we are “doers”. (Pure science is for the “thinkers”, but pure scientists are so rare these days that the EPA might soon classify them as endangered (Won’t that be funny, they would all had to wear GPS ear tags, but at least the government would fund projects to encourage their reproduction, (interpret that last crack however you want.)))
Back to the point, I have always considered myself a fairly engineery scientist since it used to be scientists “thought”, and engineers “did”, but I do both. However, yesterday I found a new definition that I think is more accurate given the death of pure science. I was talking to an engineer I work with and I asked him what he was doing. When he told me, and I ask why he was doing that he had already done it once. He replied “last time I had to do it fast, this time I am doing it cheap”. I was baffled, why would he think that spending weeks of work was good idea just to save $216 on an instrument that will cost more than $50,000 to build, when there was no difference in performance? (To his credit fast was a damn good design, that cheap couldn’t possibly beat.) However, there was no doubt in his mind that this was the right thing to do, and I was told that his design was still so expensive that in industry he would be laughed at (mind you removing this control system all together would only save $76 from the “cheap” cost). I would have been happy with adding 0.4% to the cost and spent my time working on getting the next part to work. I don’t wish to cheapen the engineering process since many engineers are scientists too, but the mindset and goals are just different.
So my definition is that “scientists just “do” without regard to how it is done, and engineers “do” it cheaper and faster.” If that was unclear, when a scientist gets something to work it is generally the first time that has been done, so they are just glad it works they don’t care about “how”. Engineers already know “it” works they need to make it last longer, and build it cheaper.
Back to the point, I have always considered myself a fairly engineery scientist since it used to be scientists “thought”, and engineers “did”, but I do both. However, yesterday I found a new definition that I think is more accurate given the death of pure science. I was talking to an engineer I work with and I asked him what he was doing. When he told me, and I ask why he was doing that he had already done it once. He replied “last time I had to do it fast, this time I am doing it cheap”. I was baffled, why would he think that spending weeks of work was good idea just to save $216 on an instrument that will cost more than $50,000 to build, when there was no difference in performance? (To his credit fast was a damn good design, that cheap couldn’t possibly beat.) However, there was no doubt in his mind that this was the right thing to do, and I was told that his design was still so expensive that in industry he would be laughed at (mind you removing this control system all together would only save $76 from the “cheap” cost). I would have been happy with adding 0.4% to the cost and spent my time working on getting the next part to work. I don’t wish to cheapen the engineering process since many engineers are scientists too, but the mindset and goals are just different.
So my definition is that “scientists just “do” without regard to how it is done, and engineers “do” it cheaper and faster.” If that was unclear, when a scientist gets something to work it is generally the first time that has been done, so they are just glad it works they don’t care about “how”. Engineers already know “it” works they need to make it last longer, and build it cheaper.
Tuesday, November 01, 2005
A man’s advice on how to separate good men from bad.
or “Are men squirrels?”
I friend of mine who is a girl told me that she thinks of men as squirrels, since if you want to keep them around you have to be very careful since they scare easily. At first I took offence to that comment, but then the more I thought about it, it started to make sense. Some guys are like squirrels, but these guys are losers and not worth the girls attention. The mistake is a lot of women run after the squirrels. This is absolute wrong response, you shouldn’t chase a squirrel, you should be sad it ran off, and move on. You ever try to catch a squirrel? If you can catch them is worth the effort? NO!
To continue the metaphor good men are like library pigeons. It takes real effort to scare them off, and all they do is move to a safe place and watch for it to be ok to come back down. Sometimes women do stuff to scare men off, it is a fact. No seriously y’all do some stuff that absolutely baffles us. However, a good man will take a lot before he “leaves”, and then he only slips into the shadows to watch for when it is safe to return. Sometimes women (well everyone) just need to work stuff out on their own, and it is unsafe for another person to interfere with this process. Then once she is through the worst part then he can return and be supportive.
There is no metaphor for a great man, since a great man is there for you. Sure you still have to work “it” out on your own but he will be there for you. A great man will hold in his arms while your tears make you quake. (Perhaps this acts as a “getting through it” catalyst, since the sadness seems to pass in hours not days or weeks this way.) A great man looks you in the eyes when you say something “scary” and says something that makes it alright. A great man doesn’t always know what to say or do, but works through it with you. A great man helps you not take yourself or life so seriously, humor and concern really can take the edge off of life. Yes, great men are out there, but most great men start out as good men, and grow with you.
I friend of mine who is a girl told me that she thinks of men as squirrels, since if you want to keep them around you have to be very careful since they scare easily. At first I took offence to that comment, but then the more I thought about it, it started to make sense. Some guys are like squirrels, but these guys are losers and not worth the girls attention. The mistake is a lot of women run after the squirrels. This is absolute wrong response, you shouldn’t chase a squirrel, you should be sad it ran off, and move on. You ever try to catch a squirrel? If you can catch them is worth the effort? NO!
To continue the metaphor good men are like library pigeons. It takes real effort to scare them off, and all they do is move to a safe place and watch for it to be ok to come back down. Sometimes women do stuff to scare men off, it is a fact. No seriously y’all do some stuff that absolutely baffles us. However, a good man will take a lot before he “leaves”, and then he only slips into the shadows to watch for when it is safe to return. Sometimes women (well everyone) just need to work stuff out on their own, and it is unsafe for another person to interfere with this process. Then once she is through the worst part then he can return and be supportive.
There is no metaphor for a great man, since a great man is there for you. Sure you still have to work “it” out on your own but he will be there for you. A great man will hold in his arms while your tears make you quake. (Perhaps this acts as a “getting through it” catalyst, since the sadness seems to pass in hours not days or weeks this way.) A great man looks you in the eyes when you say something “scary” and says something that makes it alright. A great man doesn’t always know what to say or do, but works through it with you. A great man helps you not take yourself or life so seriously, humor and concern really can take the edge off of life. Yes, great men are out there, but most great men start out as good men, and grow with you.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)