I'm sure this is not an original idea but I just thought of it and I'd like to get some rough calculations on it.

What if we paid criminals to stop committing crimes? Released felons would be offered $10,000 per year for up to three years if they are not rearrested and hold a job. At the end of each year, the ex-con would get the check if the conditions are met. I know the recidvism rate is about 50% within 3 years and the cost of a maximum security prisoner in CA is about $35,000 per year. How much would this program have to lower the recidvism rate to save the state money?

Can you think of objections to this idea other than the immorality of practically rewarding crime?

Lotsofissues 08:26, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Why would they do this if they don't do all the other one billion obvious things that would make the world better? They (those with power) are idiots. That's why. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.225.50.83 (talk) 09:52, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The obvious one is that very few crimes are commited with the intention of getting caught. If imprisonment is not enough to deter recidivism, why would the loss of a government handout be? FiggyBee (talk) 09:53, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds cool. Are you asking to do that mathematically? Firstly there are probably hidden costs in maintaining a person out of prison anyway because it involves paying social workers/parole officers to monitor the person, programs to reintegrate them into society, and if they continue to be unemployed, the state benefits paid to them as support.

Though your idea tackles problems of recidivism due to low economic status, and the need for positive reinforcement it might be necessary to consider how the ex-con receives that money (or value) so it isn't reinvested in a life of crime rather than self-improvement. It might be worth considering how the money would be dispensed: outright check for 10 grand or vouchers, rent/travel assistance, scholarship/educational/retraining opportunities, even tax exemption. The calculation also needs to include what it saves society in terms of insurance, not increasing policing, reducing court case loads and other spinoffs.

The issues mount up, too. Recidivism is supposed to be affected by many factors such as opportunity (for repeat offenses), conditioning, social environment, social capital (as in ability to work, hold down a job, relate to non-criminal society by making new friends and start a new life), educational standards and low economic status.

For what it’s worth, I take it that if the ex-criminal is not re-arrested and holds a job it suggests the reward is not for crime (for having been a criminal) but for staying clear as you say and becomes a legitimate incentive rather than a moral issue. Julia Rossi (talk) 10:07, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How about this for an objection:I'm a law-abiding member of society,maybe retired,living on a small pension or a low wage.If I legitimately work a few hours a week,I might make a couple of thousand dollars(as when I work over a certain number of hours,my pension is cut).On my pension I might get a few thousand dollars over the year.If I go out and commit a crime,get locked up for a few months,when I come out and get a small job,I get $10,000.Surely some people will go out to commit crimes to get the money as they will be better off than working legitimately. Lemon martini (talk) 14:42, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As a law abiding tax payer, why should I pay people do not commit crime? lock them away. as for costing 35 000 a year, lower thier standard of living, and make it cost less, they lowered the standard of our living by commiting crimes in our society. Lock them away. 3 strikes and your out. Lock em away and throw away the key, especially the violent ones. Further more, most crimes are committed by teenagers, due to peer pressure, so... when they come out, make sure they do not go back to the same area. eg. Bob lives in Kent and always has, he has commited X number of crimes, so when he does get out of prison, he may not go into kent, ever again, there by eliminationg his peer group, he will have to make new friends, and they might be better people than the last bunch of hooligans —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.191.136.2 (talk) 14:58, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sources? I’m especially dubious of your statement that most crimes are committed by teenagers. I’d think politicians and CEOs would be more likely. :) As for your statement about banishing people from specific areas surly you realize this is physically and ethically impossible. It would be unenforceable, cost millions in the attempt, severely violate civil liberties, raise suicide rates by several hundred percent, and especially wouldn’t work because people have little things called "cell phones" and "email." --S.dedalus (talk) 02:16, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The greatest portion of violent crimes are committed by men in their 20s. Comparatively few violent crimes are committed by adolescents. The only serious crime in the U.S. (not counting status offenses) that is predominantly a juvenile crime is arson. See the the FBI Uniform Crime Reports. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 04:03, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So, you want to create the Ankh-Morpork Thieves' Guild? --Mdwyer (talk) 17:49, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am very good looking but dark in complexion.My colour and my eye region are deterrring me from looking good in photos.My eye region is a little bit expanded but my eyes are small in comparision.They make me look gloomy.And my face is also boxy in cut which makes it look large in photos.Please help me to look more photogenic. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.248.2.51 (talk) 08:38, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• How To Be Photogenic at WikiHow.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 09:21, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's great – it even helps turkeys (see point #5)! But seriously, if someone has a darker complexion, the photographer needs to drop the shot a stop or two for exposure reasons. Anyone's beauty depends on the photographer mostly. Julia Rossi (talk) 10:15, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not to mention the person who digitally "touches-up" a photograph. I've had the opportunity to see photos of people for magazine advertisments both pre and post touch-up and the difference was marked, with blemishes and other imperfections magically dissapearing in the final product. - Azi Like a Fox (talk) 11:09, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Retouching photos for glossy oh-so-glamorous advertisement-packed magazines is as standard as breathing while walking. However, a good activity (when you're really bored) is looking through those mags for photos that hadn't been carefully set up. I do it from time to time. --Ouro (blah blah) 17:17, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I like it when the mags for some reason decide to publish their pet celebrities in all their wrinkled, weathered, naturally saggy glory just for a change. Maybe the retoucher quits (unlike Sisyphus) and this is allowed while they chase up another to take their place. Julia Rossi (talk) 10:26, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For a slightly exaggerated touch up sequence, see Evolution (Dove). GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 09:52, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Julia's recommendation that "if someone has a darker complexion, the photographer needs to drop the shot a stop or two for exposure reasons" was apparently taken to heart but inexpertly applied by the photographer of my high school yearbook. Every single photograph of a black person in that yearbook is overexposed, and no photograph of a white person is. —Angr ^{If you've written a quality article...} 10:13, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dang. Where do they recruit those yearbook shooters from! I thought putting the stop back was meant to "underexpose" the subject. Julia Rossi (talk) 22:20, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Does it? I'm not a photographer, I wouldn't know. Anyway, if you were saying photographers should slightly underexpose photographs of dark-complexioned people, then the photographer was doing it bass-ackwards anyway. —Angr ^{If you've written a quality article...} 07:57, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There is no such thing as a "beer atom", right? It would have to be a molecule (which is made up by x atoms, right?), right? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.225.50.83 (talk) 10:48, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Correct. Beer is not a chemical element, so there is no such thing as a "beer atom". Actually, there is no such thing as a "beer molecule" either - beer is a mixture of ethanol and other substances in water. Gandalf61 (talk) 10:58, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This explains why so many people view beer as a solution... Sorry. Faithfully, Deltopia (talk) 15:04, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There is a beeriodic table of the elements, though. :) --Sean 15:55, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Beer atoms? Of course. You need to split them to put bubbles in beer. Einstein invented Rock and Roll also. Gwinva (talk) 20:40, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Haha, kudos on your pun Delt. --72.69.148.54 (talk) 21:23, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ein stein voll Bier ist gut, zwei steins sind besser. — Michael J 02:21, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

One thing that bugs me about time travel is that it's rarely addressed that the earth rotates and spins millions of miles in orbit around the sun in time, so to appear in the same place and not floating out in the void is you'd have to calculate exactly when the earth would reappear under your feet, making it not possible to jump to whatever time you want to. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.225.50.83 (talk) 11:04, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. And? FiggyBee (talk) 12:01, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So you can accept travel through time, but not through the spartial dimensions O_o .... but anyway I know what you mean, some shows are done in stupid ways. What I hate more is the way inter/intra gallatic travel is done, its like that they always skip the most obvious way to perform the travel, by traveling at 0.9999999c. if you travel very very close to c, you practically instantenously appear at your destination. No shows use this because the downside is why you are travelling billions of years go by on earth. Still its much more likly to reach this travel than to reach travel that both breaks the speeed of light, and yet still isn't instantaneous but takes 'a few hours'--58.111.143.164 (talk) 12:14, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually to travel at even half the speed of light would require just about all mater in this arm of the galaxy as fuel. Still not that much more feasible. . . --S.dedalus (talk) 02:05, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Um, you wanna show us that calculation? --Trovatore (talk) 19:19, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That is a bit of an overstatement, but even so, at 0.5c, your mass would only be 1.15 times rest mass, so the energy of the craft would be ${\displaystyle 1.15m*c^{2}-mc^{2}}$. If we assume the spaceship is roughly the same mass as the space shuttle, this equates to 10¹⁶ joules. This is a lot - to produce this much energy on Earth, we'd have to divert the power from every single power station on the planet for an entire day - we'd have to be at least a Type I civilisation to achieve this much power on a spacecraft over a reasonable timescale. Laïka 12:14, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I time travel all the time, but only ever seem to go forward, exept, when on a trip —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.191.136.2 (talk) 13:20, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to be assuming that in the absence of special compensation you'd "stay in the same place" in some absolute sense, but all evidence suggests that there's no absolute space to give meaning to a notion of sameness of place. Your question could only be answered in the context of some well-defined scientific theory that allowed for time travel. I suppose exotic spacetime geometries in general relativity are the closest we have to such a thing. If you had a geometric wormhole whose exit was in the causal past of the entrance (and I'm not implying that such a thing is possible), then you could perhaps put both ends in orbit around the Earth. Then you'd go in one, and come out the other, and you'd necessarily be in Earth orbit because that's where the exit was. The point is that the entrance and exit points are themselves inertial objects which follow the same rules as everything else, including orbiting the sun rather than staying fixed with respect to absolute space. -- BenRG (talk) 16:44, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm reminded of that scene in The Restaurant at the End of the Universe where Zaphod asks to be taken to the nearest restaurant. As Arthur Dent points out, they travel millions of years ahead in time but don't move an inch. --Richardrj ^{talk email} 16:59, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You need to travel through time and space at the same time. If one is unlucky enough not to have a TARDIS then a Vortex manipulator should do the trick. Gwinva (talk) 20:45, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is addressed in some time travel stories. Traci Harding's Ancient Future trilogy addresses the issue (but not until the second book), as well as Bearing an Hourglass, the second book of Piers Anthony's Incarnations of Immortality series. In these cases it involves a calculated movement or distortion in the time-space continuum to remove the spatial travel issue. I've heard of it as a means of fast (but not FTL) travel as well, by creating a time shield and letting everything else move around you. In other time travel accounts, the magic (rather than science) involved is Earth-based, so the magic keeps you earth-bound during the travelling. Steewi (talk) 01:00, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

im trying to lose a little bit of weight at the moment and was wondering which of the two would be most beneficial —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.149.110.226 (talk) 11:52, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Jogging, unless you are moving around while you skip, then skipping. But if you skip in the same place, jogging.--58.111.143.164 (talk) 12:16, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Don't only jog! Crunches, weights, push-ups - anything to get you sweating and exercising different muscules at the same time. Let some of that energy get useful! --Ouro (blah blah) 14:29, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I agree with Ouro totally. If you're really committed to getting into shape, you'll need to do more than jog. A healthy, balanced diet is essential, along with consistent exercise. If you really want to lose weight, buy a membership at your local gym and ask for help from the trainers there. Another method (OR, oh noes!) I've found personally beneficial because it burns a lot of calories and is relaxing is swimming. Plus being in such skimpy clothing makes you want to lose weight even more =P. Hope this helped. --72.69.148.54 (talk) 21:21, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This space reserved for a more thorough note on losing weight to be added in the morning, when I get sober. --Ouro (blah blah) 00:26, 25 January 2008 (UTC) Okay, this is as OR as it ever gets. When I needed to shed off those unwanted pounds back in 2004, I adhered to a very strict regime. First of all, diet - no fried food, no butter, no sugar, (almost) no chocolate, cakes and things, lots of food and juices, vegetables, no sauces, ketchupy things and the like. Second - exercise. Once on the morning, once during the day, once in the evening - 150 crunches, 30 push-ups and exercises with weights. Third - outdoor activities, long (70+ km) bike trips and long (20+ km) walks. At the end of the month I felt sooooo good... at first it's very difficult to submit yourself to something like this, but you very much get used to the fact that you are healtier and in shape. Good luck! --Ouro (blah blah) 07:38, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is Semen ever actually used as a name? I'm sure I've seen it before but I'm not 100%. In reference to this edit. I don't think it was vandalism --Tombomp (talk) 13:19, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There's the Russian Семён, which reads Syemyon, and the Ukrainian Семен, which should read something like Siemien (but pronounced somewhat harder than Russian), they are both translations of the English name Simon. That's the closest I come to the diff you mentioned. --Ouro (blah blah) 15:25, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

there was the famous German physicist Siemens, and of course the footballer David Seaman--TreeSmiler (talk) 18:31, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please to not be forgetting early Grand Prix driver Richard Seaman, known to his friends as Dick. Also see List of unusual personal names 161.222.160.8 (talk) 00:09, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Welsh version of "Simon" is Seimon ... Neıl ☎ 11:41, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There was a Governor of South Australia named the Reverend Sir Keith Seaman. -- JackofOz (talk) 21:05, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I know it's a bit corny but a long time ago I saw a definition of dancing (the old-fashioned way where the guy and the woman were in close embrace) as " A naval (navel) engagement without loss of seamen (semen)"220.238.74.36 (talk) 05:05, 27 January 2008 (UTC) . Get it.220.238.74.36 (talk) 05:04, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reminds me of the old saw "She was only the admiral's daughter - her navel base was always full of discharged seamen".  :) JackofOz (talk) 03:35, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have been "alone" for years now (no friends). However, I see mum daily and sometimes dad, my brother and sales people etc. I pretty much only cuddle with my cat for "human" touch.

When mum were on vacation without me in the past for like a week or two, or when I lived in my own place for almost two years, I began to feel really isolated. If that happens so quickly, even with access to the Internet, how would it be to spend years alone on a remote island or like Will Smith's character in the post-apocalyptic "I Am Legend"? Granted he had the dog, but I would probably start hallucinate in less than a year, and this despite me being anti social and a lonewolf to begin with... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.225.50.83 (talk) 13:26, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There is no precise answer to your questions "How long before you go crazy?" and "How would it be to spend years alone on a remote island or in a post-apocalyptic world?" It depends a lot on the situation and outlook as well as on an individual's mental framework and options. Maybe the articles on solitude (and solitary confinement) can offer a start. As for film reference, when there is no dog, compressed air clad in leather will have to do. ---Sluzzelin talk 13:50, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have lived in a situation in which I spent 16-20 hours a day inside a 14 square metre room for six months and sometimes spent three days running inside the room. Ten days ago, I couldn't stand the stress any more (let's just say I had too much time to think) and went back to my parents' home... I can't give you an average figure, it's just my own experience. Hope it interests you.

On the other hand, I believe somebody in a post-apocaliptic situation would remain sane for a longer time (maybe indefinitely) as he would have many basic needs and problems to keep his mind busy and prevent him from retreating into his own mind too much. -- Leptictidium (mammal talk!) 13:52, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You DO have friends, we are just here! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnluckie (talk • contribs) 13:55, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It may depend on whether or not you break your reading glasses and/or have a volleyball with you.

Atlant (talk) 14:04, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would guess there has been academic literature published on this subject (or similar ones), with examples culled from the experiences of castaways, kidnapping victims, prisoners in solitary confinement, POWs, etc. Ask at a local university library for help finding studies. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 03:58, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How about this as an introduction? http://www.popi.tanos.org.uk/weblog/138653/ - 12 hours in isolation as the maximum you'd want to try, and really weird effects after 48 hours. Legirons (talk) 18:44, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How crazy is "crazy" to you? Say, for instance, you decide that for comfort you invent an imaginary friend - it's perfectly normal for children, not so normal for adults, but not totally psycho, either. It's just a little bit of craziness that you use to keep your sanity, and I think with such a friend the length of time you could survive would be a lot longer.209.244.187.155 (talk) 17:36, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Wilson!!!!!"

Atlant (talk) 00:27, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What does this phrase mean? It's most commonly seen in Private Eye during transcripts, although it also appears with less frequency in other publications (this Guardian article for instance uses the phrase "George Bush (for it is he) turns to vice-president Dick Cheney"). Where does the phrase come from, and why is it so common in satirical works? Laïka 15:24, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Originated, I believe, by Private Eye, and was taken up from there. It implies a sense of unwarranted gravity/self-importance.86.197.148.206 (talk)

15:40, 24 January 2008 (UTC)DT

(ec) It goes back at least to Bleak House:

This fellow approaches as he speaks. Mr. Weevle softly holds up his finger, and draws him into the passage, and closes the street door. Then they go upstairs, Mr. Weevle heavily, and Mr. Guppy (for it is he) very lightly indeed. When they are shut into the back room, they speak low.

and it also occurs in the Nausicaa chapter of Ulysses:

Then all melted away dewily in the grey air: all was silent. Ah! She glanced at him as she bent forward quickly, a pathetic little glance of piteous protest, of shy reproach under which he coloured like a girl He was leaning back against the rock behind. Leopold Bloom (for it is he) stands silent, with bowed head before those young guileless eyes. What a brute he had been! At it again?

In both cases the idea is to identify a character who has been previously mentioned but not named. Its use by Private Eye etc is more clichéd and facetious.. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 15:42, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The meaning might be paraphrased in modern informal English is "(he's the one we've been talking about)" or more literally as "([I mentioned this name now] because the one we've been talking about is him)". --Anonymous, 20:00 UTC, edited 23:26, January 24, 2008.

If you've ever been 13 this sort of thing might sound familiar.

I've been thinking (in circles, really) about recursive thoughts and desires.

I can't get very far without going crazy.

Here's what I mean by recursive Thoughts and Desires.

Thought n+1 is a thought about Thought n.

e.g. Does John like Jen?

Thought 0 (John): I like Jen.

Thought 1 (Jen): I think John likes me.

Thought 2 (John): I think Jen thinks I like her.

...

Desire n+1 is a desire for Desire n.

(implicitly: not Desire n, but desiring Desire n)

e.g. Wanting to exercise

Desire 0: I exercise.

Desire 1: (I don't exercise, but...) I want to exercise.

Desire 2: I want to want to exercise. ...

We can define these thoughts and desires to the next level indefinitely, in some sense, but I can't imagine a meaningful situation much past the examples I give (which I've personally experienced).

(I have a bit of a theory that past a certain level "I think you think I think" and "I think you think I think you think I think ..." etc. are indistinguishable.)

My challenge, I guess: how far can you cook up a clear example of recursive thinking/desire to a level distinguishable from all previous levels? 207.148.157.228 (talk) 15:47, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I want to want to want to exercise?--Dlo2012 (talk) 17:10, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You have quoted from the book Knots by r.d. laing it is basically poetry. and any way most of his theories have been shown to be dufunk. nul and void. he was a physcologist. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.18.35.90 (talk) 18:43, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The examples are confusing. The "recursive thought" example involves two people. Do they know what the other thinks? Is the whole thing a thought experiment in a single person's mind? The "recursive desires" example seems to be about multiple things -- at least wanting both to exercise and not to. If nothing was stopping this person from acting on their desire to exercise they could just act on it. There would be no need for "desiring to desire" to come up at all unless the initial desire was not possible to act on, or was not really a desire at all. The example given sounds like the person doesn't desire to exercise but wishes they did. So I don't really understand the question precisely. I have two guesses though.

First, is this essentially the same as asking how many distinct ideas one can hold in their mind at the same time? The working memory page describes various theories and links to the wonderfully-named page The Magical Number Seven, Plus or Minus Two (short for ""The Magical Number Seven, Plus or Minus Two: Some Limits on Our Capacity for Processing Information"). Leaving aside whether your recursive thought is useful, perhaps 5-9 levels of recursion, or 5-9 distinct ideas of any kind at all, would be about the limit of what you can hold in your mind at the same time and understand as meaningfully distinct. Whether it is useful is another issue. "I think I'm hungry", "I thought "I think I'm hungry"", "I thought "I thought "I think I'm hungry""", and so on, to 5-9 levels, may be a useless thing to think, but still "meaningful". But there's no need for recursion in this case -- any ideas will fill up working memory in this way.

Second, is this more of a "purely abstract" thought experiment? How many levels of recursive ideas can there be without being indistinguishable from one level less? In a purely abstract sense there is no limit. Each new "framing" of an idea results in a new and different idea. As a concrete example, take ancestry. My great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-grandfather is quite distinct from my great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-grandfather.

Finally, I'm considering the "recursive thought" part of this only. I don't quite see how emotions can be recursive. The word is not well defined, as the emotion page makes clear. My usual understanding of the word is that an emotion is a physical feeling plus a thought. So, for example, pain is a physical feeling, while suffering is the emotion of being in pain and thinking about it. But that is just me. There is, however, the notion of meta-emotion.

See also Infinite regress and Map–territory relation. Pfly (talk) 02:18, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

i shaped the world and may 2nd is my day?what am i talking about? its a question i was given to research on the internet.am still researching on all famous things that occured on that date but no luck.assistance wud be nyce —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.49.87.196 (talk) 16:01, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Take your pick. --Richardrj ^{talk email} 16:14, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why is circumcision frequently associated with cutting off a part of the actual penis? I mean... not just the foreskin? Am I missing something here? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.225.50.83 (talk) 16:28, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Frequently? where is your source? If removal of part of the penis other than the foreskin happens then the cause could be negligence on the part of the practitioner. However, I think you may be missing something. Richard Avery (talk) 16:40, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I sincerely hope he's not missing something :) --Richardrj ^{talk email} 17:02, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

All it is is the foreskin. Castration is losing the testicles. I don't think there's an actual word for losing the penis. (However, the term female circumscision refers to removing the clitoris and various other parts, and is the sensory equivalent of penis-loss. For this reason, circumsision is a pretty ill-chosen name.) --Masamage ♫ 17:05, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Penectomy is when the guy looses the guyness. --Ouro (blah blah) 17:12, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, hey, Latin roots. 8P Right, then, thank you! --Masamage ♫ 23:13, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Only one Latin root there; ectomy is all Greek. —Tamfang (talk) 09:25, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See also: Emasculation. That's right, kids. It's not just a figure of speech. It has a literal meaning, also. EvilCouch (talk) 06:29, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

snap "That's the word!" --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 17:22, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OR commonly know as a John_and_Lorena_Bobbitt--TreeSmiler (talk) 18:40, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My guess is that it comes from a fear of losing one's manliness. Putting a knife anywhere near that area will make most guys cringe, so it's not surprising that it gets a little exaggerated. Steewi (talk) 01:07, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This question reminds me a lot of this [[1]]. Cryo921 (talk) 06:11, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There is no skin to pull back and forth, so I assume it is extremely difficult. What do you say? And yes, this is a serious question, and no, I'm not a troll, and blablabla... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.225.50.83 (talk) 17:30, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As I understand it, circumcised guys usually use some sort of lube, like hand cream or Vaseline. —Angr ^{If you've written a quality article...} 17:34, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's not difficult at all; there is still a good amount skin available. Lube is not required. (I'm speaking entirely from OR here, sorry.) Faithfully, Deltopia (talk) 17:50, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ditto. --LarryMac | Talk 17:51, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, depending on the circumcision (and I believe this goes true for most), there is no skin available. Speaking from someone who received a medically necessary adult circumcision due to phimosis, I never got used to "jerkin it" without the foreskin. I actually ended up getting used to using my boxers as an aid to replicate the function of the foreskin, as I don't like the mess that comes with lubricant. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rc251 (talk • contribs) 17:54, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah but what about the mess that 'comes' in your boxers? :). Any way this is why I believe males of the Jewish faith were originally circumcised: to stop sinful self abuse.--TreeSmiler (talk) 18:26, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I can't say it's impossible, but you're not going to find much evidence of it in the Bible. (In fact the Bible hardly mentions masturbation at all -- contrary to the popular notion, the sin of Onan was apparently that he refused to impregnate his sister-in-law, thereby failing in his duty to give his dead brother an heir. Or something like that.) What you're talking about sounds more like the justification that was used in the United States in, oh, the late 19th and early 20th centuries, I think. Same time frame in which breakfast cereal was invented, and for the same reason -- figure that one out. --Trovatore (talk) 07:30, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The mess doesn't come in my boxers. Most boxers have slits, so sticking "it" partially out, you can use the boxers to replicate the function of the foreskin and proceed as normal. I'm sure this isn't common among most people but I just can't get used to lubricant. And for people with tight circumcisions, there really isn't any skin on the shaft to use. --Rc251 (talk) 18:32, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The skin of the shaft acts as a perfectly adequate replacement. It's all in the grip ;) --WebHamster 18:29, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Diagram?--TreeSmiler (talk) 18:33, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly, if you're looking for movies of circumcized guys jacking off, you can find them all over the internet! --24.147.69.31 (talk) 04:17, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No I was asking for a diagram of WebHamsters grip--TreeSmiler (talk) 04:38, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am again shocked at the inadequate studies in the Journal of the American Medical Association. I don't -know- this, but I suspect most people are like Rc251 and me in that they can't be arsed to buy, apply, and clean up lubricants. I have heard, in occasional barroom conversations, talk of a "finishing cloth" which I surmise is used in the same manner as Rc's boxers. I hadn't really thought about it before, but I think the variety of replies here probably implies that there are variations in circumcisions (as, indeed, there are in wangs) so no one answer can be definitive. Faithfully, Deltopia (talk) 19:33, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Simple answer: you pretend you're a woman and do it their way!--TreeSmiler (talk) 01:41, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What? --24.147.69.31 (talk) 04:17, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

When a circumcized penis is erect it is smooth enough to just use the hand. You don't rub anything against it except your fingers themselves. It works just fine. I imagine it's just whatever you are used to doing. I think if I suddenly had a foreskin I'd be thrown off too. --24.147.69.31 (talk) 04:17, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have a bunch of old VHS-C cartridges. I have a VHS-C-to-VHS converter as well, so let's just say I have a bunch of VHS cartridges.

OK. I wanna get them into my PC somehow without installing equipment in the PC or using a VCR and elaborate, advanced stuff. Quality is NOT a priority.

I heard there is supposed to be a USB "magic box" for exactly this purpose, in which you put a VHS/VHS-C and plug it in via USB to your PC and it transfers video somehow. Do you know what it might be called so I can search for it? (I run Windows on the PC, if that matters.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.225.50.83 (talk) 18:21, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have a USB device that allows me to plug in a VCR's output and thus capture video to my PC (with the appropriate software). My device was from "Dazzle" which either was part of or was acquired by Pinnacle Systems, which appears to now be part of Avid Technology. I am not aware of anything that has the VHS(/C) drive mechanism built into it, that seems like it would be a highly specialized product. --LarryMac | Talk 18:27, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You are going to have to buy equipment. There are tons of video capture cards and USB devices on the market. You can find them in any large electronics store. -- Diletante (talk) 18:47, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The last few years, PHP has been promoting OOP heavily. I can't stand OOP and I refuse to code in it. Why do those two things lack procedural means of doing things when all others (that I know of) don't? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.225.50.83 (talk) 20:05, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well hullo, PDO is pretty explicitly OOP (hence the O). If you want to access databases without using PDO there are plenty of other database functions with procedural approaches.

As for DOM, well, there are plenty of XML parser functions for reading XML. If you want to create XML without using OOP (which is not a good idea in my opinion), you can always just treat it like a big string.

Anyway, the short answer to why-doesn't-everything-in-PHP-do-things-just-the-way-you'd-like-them is because, well, that's not how the developers did it. It's pretty clear that different people worked on all of the different function groups as they all have very different syntax (the only real problem I have with PHP is that it is very patchwork compared to most languages; there's no one reliable way that things are going to work with any given set of functions). Still, I think asking that two very explicitly OOP-heavy concepts (DOM and PDO) have non-OOP functions might be asking for a bit much.

And honestly, come on! Just because you don't like it doesn't mean you shouldn't figure out how to use it if it's something you need to use. I don't like the way PHP does a lot of things but that doesn't exactly give me the luxury of throwing my hands up and refusing to do things when I have to. --24.147.69.31 (talk)

QXR means, I think, "You transmitted wrong". (Our article Q code doesn't say so, but see sv:Q-förkortningar.) Was the callsign WQXR meant as a joke?—msh210℠ 20:16, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An explanation of the original call letters can be found at WQEW, which is what the AM side of WQXR-FM has been called since 1992. — Michael J 03:09, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks.—msh210℠ 19:17, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I like a girl BUT I CANT tell her She knows me a little n only passes smiles when we meet or when she sees me When I try to be close by askingf for coffee or study she feels uncomfortable

Well she doesn’t like me or dislike me I guess

What shall I do to approach her or make her feel how much I like her deeply How can I attract her?plz help —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.128.4.231 (talk) 20:19, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There are probably hundreds of websites that are appropriate for these Dear Abby type questions. This is not one of them. --LarryMac | Talk 20:39, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

People can ask about alien invasion but not about relationships?.

Indeed, I’m not sure how much we can do to answer this type of question, but there’s no reason as far as I know why we shouldn’t try. This comes up quit often here. --S.dedalus (talk) 01:39, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

False dichotomy. --LarryMac | Talk 14:19, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If she seems uncomfortable she probably doesn't like you. If you have really deep feelings for her and you can't pull it together and tell her to her face, try writing a letter. If you just want to approach her try being attentive, show her that you care by listening to her, finding out her likes and dislikes, etc. --Yamanbaiia^{(free hugs!)} 22:15, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't crosspost on multiple reference desks. --208.81.93.39 (talk) 04:40, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What is the number always used in movies for phone numbers? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.225.50.83 (talk) 22:03, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

They don't use one number, but they pretty much always start 555- see 555 telephone number (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/555_telephone_number) ny156uk (talk) 22:07, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Jenny's" phone number has been used a lot (see 867-5309/Jenny). You could also check out Category:Numbers in pop culture.--Yamanbaiia^{(free hugs!)} 22:09, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As you see at 555 telephone number, the numbers reserved for fictional use in the North American Numbering Plan are now just 555-01XX. With only 100 different numbers available, we now see the same numbers repeating in different movies. Of course, some movies use other approaches: never show the whole number, use an impossible number, use a number belonging to the production company (which is answered with an advertisement), or use a valid number and hope to get away with it. --Anonymous, 23:31 UTC, January 24, 2008.

In the UK, Ofcom provides a list of fictional numbers, which are less obviously made up than the 555 ones. (Can't get to their website at the moment to confirm an exact pagesee here. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 08:59, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can you name your child anything you want? Like something without vowels or constinents. Also can you put a number in there name? Or even spell the entire name with numbers. And can you spell your childs name "johnny" and insist you say it like "rasputant". Well ive come to the RD after NONE opf my teachers could awnser. BonesBrigade 22:25, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This will depend on the jurisdiction you are in. If half-remembered anecdote is to be trusted, in Germany the official you register your child's name with is empowered to refuse really stupid names. Algebraist 22:41, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's true, and I think it's true in other European countries, too. Check out Brfxxccxxmnpcccclllmmnprxvclmnckssqlbb11116 for an example from Sweden. I also vaguely remember a story about parents in Roussillon wanting to give their son a Catalan name rather than a French one and the authorities wouldn't let them. In the U.S., on the other hand, I think anything goes. When my grandmother was a little girl, she knew twin boys named First Thessalonians and Second Thessalonians. —Angr ^{If you've written a quality article...} 22:47, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it is dependent on the country you are in. In the U.S., you can name your child anything you want, including numbers, strange pronunciations, etc. See Jennifer 8. Lee (although her legal name has it spelled out as "Eight") and Jon Blake Cusack 2.0. Other countries restrict the names to those that will not cause the child undue embarrassment or difficulties in life. Germany is pretty restrictive, there's a bit about it in German name#Rufname. Sweden has restrictions (see Brfxxccxxmnpcccclllmmnprxvclmnckssqlbb11116), as does New Zealand (see 4Real/Superman). jwillbur 22:58, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Judging by this story, Spain seems to be extremely restrictive. jwillbur 23:06, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In France it's up to the official you register with (like Algebraist said). It can be anything you want as long as it's not something completly ridiculous or degradant. If after a month the parents have not chosen a proper name, the people from the registration office will choose one for them.--Yamanbaiia^{(free hugs!)} 23:26, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I remember a reference to some jurisdiction allowing children to sue their parents for excessively embarrassing names (fake?). Korean name and Japanese name both imply restrictions to the writeability of personal names into hanja or kanji. Steewi (talk) 01:16, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was at school with a lad whose legal name was 'Jhonathan'. There had been a typo at some point when registering his name. Also see the second paragraph of the Davey Boy Smith article... ;) --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 01:22, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Couldnt the parents Technically just go and change it citing a typo on the johnathan thing? and my sig is so much more awesome now BonesBrigade 02:11, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I once met a woman named Diania pronounced Diana – a nurse had miscopied it. Why she kept the misspelling is beyond me. I informally changed my middle name from Anthony to Anton and officialdom never batted an eye. —Tamfang (talk) 09:32, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I read that Quebec is unique in North America in having the ability to refuse ridiculous names for kids. They don't use the power very often. But apparently, one couple tried to name their daughter "Spatula" or something similar. That was rejected.

In the Czech Republic, on the other hand, the authorities have traditionally been very strict with names. It used to be that you could only name your kid something on the calendar of saints' days. Now, it's easier to choose another name, but the authorities will reject anything too radical. You could never invent a name like Nevaeh in the Czech Republic. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 03:52, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In Poland it's also quite strict, however right now the Polish authorities are allowing the use of non-Polish names like Angelika or Jessica (or Jessika) - in those spellings, which have no tradition of use in Poland. Thought-up names are not allowed. --Ouro (blah blah) 07:42, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Iceland is another with a process of approving new names: see Icelandic name. One of the criteria is whether the name can be declined grammatically. Telsa (talk) 11:36, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Additionally, the U.S. military doesn't seem to have any regulations on what their members can change their names to. For reference, see Optimus Prime#Cultural influence. Dismas|^(talk) 16:40, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Regardless of any restrictions on the spelling of a name, the pronunciation is not something that can ever be regulated by a bureaucracy. For example, if you name your child Siobhan, which is pronounced Shi-vawn, be prepared for lots of people to call her S-eye-o-ban. -- JackofOz (talk) 20:56, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

IIRC France and Belgium up until about 1984 had a list of about 2000 names that you had to choose from-you couldn't choose a name that wasn't on the list... Lemon martini (talk) 21:02, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As for using a number, see Jennifer 8. Lee for an example of someone relatively famous. 204.10.160.194 (talk) 02:03, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Obviously there is no rule against this in the United States, or celebrities would not be able to name their children "Pilot Inspektor" or "Kal-El". Adam Bishop (talk) 09:09, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Or Moon Unit. —Angr ^{If you've written a quality article...} 09:37, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Obligatory XKCD link. Ojw (talk) 19:56, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I put an avi video on my sd memory card and then put it in my wii, but whyen i tried to watch it, it said that the wii does not support that kind of file. When i checked both the wii manual and wikipedia, they both said that it does play avi files. Then why is it that it won't play my avi video? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dlo2012 (talk • contribs) 22:34, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Probably doesn't have the right codec --Tagishsimon (talk) 22:37, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Download the SUPER converter and convert the file to flat .avi, sans codec. --^(FNM) _(BANANA!) 02:23, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An AVI file NEVER has a codec. AVI is simply a container. The video and audio is stored in some method and the FourCC helps the program to recognise what method. It then passes the data through an appropriate codec (if it has one). I can tell you straight away that you will not be putting uncompressed video in the avi. What you probably mean is a more compression format that the Wii supports. The codec is in the Wii not the AVI file. The AVI file simply has the data the codec decodes. Nil Einne (talk) 16:29, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What's the normal maximum gradient in the developed world, or even better, New Zealand? Of course extremities like Baldwin Street are out of the question, but I just want to make sure if 200W is enough to power a person up at walking speed (1m s^-1). Also can anyone confirm my calculation of ignoring any resistance, 200W can power 75kg load up a 15 degree (27%) slope at 1m s^-1? --antilived^{T | C | G} 01:46, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would search www.transit.govt.nz ; they are bound to have some statistics (or at least links). Gwinva (talk) 04:13, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here in the Western US, any grade of 4% or steeper gets a road sign warning truckers; the standard highway grade seems to be 5% to 8%, and sustaned grades of more than 10% are only found on very minor roads. --Carnildo (talk) 09:07, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I once found a page on wikipedia, about a music/audio 'phenomenon'? In this 'phenomenon', it sounds as if it's constantly descending, and it works because there are really 4 tones ( i think ) and when one reaches a lower bound, it goes back to the top. Anybody know what I'm talking about and wouldn't mind providing the proper link? Thanks. 67.174.193.69 (talk) 04:03, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here it is Shepard_tone--TreeSmiler (talk) 04:48, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(After e/c)

Any repeated change of a given interval will eventually result in a repeating pattern; thus, if you keep moving down major thirds from C, you will reach C again two octaves later, whereupon the pattern starts over again. However, by the time the pattern starts over, the notes will be one or more octaves away from the starting point. Musically, it may be necessary to 'jump up' an octave at some point, as in the theme of the First Movement of Brahms Fourth Symphony, where the composer uses this 'broken' figure of descending thirds as the main melodic material. The article interval may help you, although it does not (as far as I see) mention this property. --MatthewLiberal (talk) 04:54, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I think TreeSmiler's response was more what you were looking for -- I didn't quite understand the question -- so never mind me! Shepard tones are quite cool. --MatthewLiberal (talk) 04:56, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's exactly what it was, thanks!67.174.193.69 (talk) 05:03, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you ever happen to be at the Exploratorium, you can hear one of these, but their version constantly ascends. It's a very impressive effect.

Atlant (talk) 13:27, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have always found this a little confusing. Why when Vader Brings Luke to see the Emporer, the Emporer says "He's looking forward to completing his training", however, a short time later the Emporer tells luke to "strike him down" because he's defenseless. Then later he tells luke to kill Vader and take Vader's place as the right hand man of the Emporer. This scenario would create 3 options for Luke if he wanted to join the Dark side:

1. Give in and Join the dark side 2. Kill the Emporer and rule the Galaxy as father and son. 3. Kill Vader and become the sith lord.

So why does The Emporer want Luke to kill him? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.210.98.148 (talk) 04:09, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, without getting into all the speculation as to whether or not the Emperor had many clones of him made etc. etc., it's worth noting that the Emperor was not, in fact, defenseless, despite what he said, as he demonstrated later by zapping them both with force lightening. --24.147.69.31 (talk) 04:13, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That, however, does not answer the question. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.210.98.148 (talk) 04:25, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

He doesn't want Luke to kill him. He wants Luke to try and kill him, because that would mean Luke giving in to his hatred, which would leave him vulnerable to the dark side. As 69.31 pointed out, the Emperor was in reality far from defenseless, and no doubt thought he could take anything Luke could throw at him. FiggyBee (talk) 04:40, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So why does he then tell Luke to Kill Vader? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.210.98.148 (talk) 04:45, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Because Sith only rule 2 at a time, master and apprentice. The emperor wanted to remain master and replace vadar with his more powerful son.--155.144.251.120 (talk) 04:56, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What bugged me about that scene — Luke came there expecting to die (and take badguys with him). During at least part of the scene, he's standing beside a window that looks out on vacuum. So why doesn't it cross his mind to light up his phallic symbol and break the window? —Tamfang (talk) 09:36, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well the Death Star still shielded at the time and while it was never explained it's resonable to assume the shield will stop the atmosphere leaving even with a broken windows. Also, even without shields the Death Star was designed to be a fairly hardy ship. With an amazingly stupid flaw but still otherwise hardy. The windows were I presume designed to stand against crashing fighters, proton torpedos, laser blasts etc. I somehow doubt that the phallic symbol would be able to damage the window sufficiently to break it. It might not even penetrate it at all. It's logical to assume the window was made of some sort of extremely tough polymer probably several metres thick. Nil Einne (talk) 16:23, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also, if he killed himself, the movie would have been over. Adam Bishop (talk) 19:07, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So? It was due to end soon anyway – and it's not as if the only significant characters were in that room. —Tamfang (talk) 22:37, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

But he's the hero, I mean, George Lucas is a crappy writer and such, but he wouldn't kill the protagonist! Adam Bishop (talk) 11:56, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

He was still holding out hope that he would be able to 'rescue' his father. So even if he thought he could cut through the station's outer hull (the window counts as part of the hull) before Vader and the emperor could stop him, or escape, he would still be hesitant to do that because it would kill his father. APL (talk) 17:23, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, according to the original concepts, Vaders suit would allow him to survive in space. He was supposed to pass between his own Interceptor to the Blockade runner. Of anyone in the Star Wars arena, he therefore has the best chance of any to survive such an incident.--Koncorde (talk) 13:22, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

He still needed to breathe though right? Does he carry an oxygen tank on him too? :). In any case, as noted above, I would think the emperor had some sort of defense ready just in case. Also, on another note, Vader wanted to rule with Luke at his side right? Why did Vader end up fighting him? He could have let Luke take a stab at the emperor (if it worked), or did he know that he was outmatched? (Or did he still believe A la episode 3 the emperor could bring back his wife?)--GTPoompt(talk) 01:30, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In the engieering consultancy industry, Knowledge, tacit (mostly available in the the consultants heads) and explicit(in files, computer systems,project reports etc) is a critical asset. I am assigned to convince top management about the importance of KM in the firm

The issue is:

How can sustainable competitive advantage be attained/created/achieved by the firm developing KM practices as a corporate culture? Tkabaza (talk) 07:17, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Trite I know, but the first and foremost reason for a firm such as yours to exist(assuming you are NOT a charity) is to survive - in a very competitive market place. In short - if you're not fast - you're last! And if your top management can't see or won't see that, then they're yesterday's men. Trouble is, many such dinosaurs exist long enough to take home a big fat pay-off or pension, while all around them are other hard working and ambitious colleagues trying to stay ahead, if not abreast of the competition. Oh, by the way, dinosaurs aren't always "old" - there are many stick-in-the-muds in their 20's and 30's who really should be "let go" too. Good Luck in your efforts, but being World-Class really does mean getting off your Butt and doing the Benchmarking to see whereabouts you are in the field, and if you can see any others out in front, you had better start getting fit and lean - or else!!!!81.145.241.211 (talk) 13:18, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is this the real David Blaine, or some sort of guy making a parody of him? Is he parodying himself? What's with the "look"? Why is nobody amazed by the tricks he actually does? They just find it funny (which they are, too). But he does a lot of really awesome stunts without cuts, like making people "fly" and put on roofs, etc. Nobody seems to wonder how this is done. I don't get it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.225.50.83 (talk) 11:25, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think you're allowing Blaine's casual performing technique to colour your judgment. He's a conjurer with a particular and idiosyncratic approach. The normal wonderment about how he achieves his tricks still pertains. What is your evidence that "Nobody seems to wonder how this is done"? Any lack of wonderment is surely nothing more than an artifact of the way the TV programmes are edited? --Tagishsimon (talk) 11:32, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is who the real David Blaine? Are you referring to a similar question t.hat was asked here on 9 January?--Shantavira|^{feed me} 12:15, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My guess is the anon is referring to the series of parody videos of David Blaine (part 1 here). No, they are not real, it's just a parody.

judging by the fact that his beard is drawn on with a marker, iwould say its safe to assume hes not the real david blaine —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.101.53.138 (talk) 17:38, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Any recommended free chess server that supports ELO rating among its users? If that's impossible, I'm willing to pay a small sum of money, too. Thanks. --Taraborn (talk) 11:41, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

All chess servers I know (www.gamecolony.com is where I'm playing this very moment, games.yahoo.com is where most people go, the ICC is a popular non-free site) have some kind of rating system that resembles the Elo (not an acronym!) rating system, but for the real thing you have to play official, over-the-board games. Other chess servers I should mention are the Playchess server (for which you need to buy a copy of Fritz) and the Free Internet Chess Server. 194.171.56.13 (talk) 14:14, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! --Taraborn (talk) 00:34, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If a bank gets robbed or goes bankcrupt, are my money still safe (insurace company/whatever)? If so, how long has this been the case? "Back in the day", wild west banks got robbed and your money was lost forever. These days people don't have to give a shit about the security of the bank... right? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.225.50.83 (talk) 14:57, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you are in the US, the FDIC insures accounts against insolvency, but specifically not against fraud or theft. For the latter, a bank would most likely have a policy with a private insurance company. The linked article has specific information on limits per account per institution. --LarryMac | Talk 15:10, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Most countries offer (and require) some form of insurance on deposit accounts. Our article on deposit insurance links to many of the national and international organizations responsible for such insurance. Typically personal deposits will be insured against a bank failure up to some substantial cap (several tens of thousands or euros or dollars, at a minimum). The idea is to protect private individuals and small businesses; it's assumed that large businesses will be able to appropriately protect their cash on their own. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 16:12, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

how do you eat a chicken? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.80.28.189 (talk) 15:11, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pluck it, gut it, stuff it if you want, and stick it in an oven. Cook it up until it reaches an inner temperature of ~100 C. You can get thermometers to measure it at a store. Then cut it up and dig in. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bellum et Pax (talk • contribs) 15:28, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

100C?? That seems excessive. --LarryMac | Talk 15:31, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Joy of Cooking recommends 170F (77C) and I've found this to be satisfactory (no bloody bird bits).

Atlant (talk) 17:30, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My meat thermometer recommends 185°F/85°C for poultry. If you use a meat thermometer, be sure to stick it into the bird's thigh, and be sure it doesn't touch the bone. —Angr ^{If you've written a quality article...} 17:39, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It depends on the meaning of "how". One answer could be that you have to kill it first, another that you may use your hands rather than a knife and fork, a third answer would be that you bake it and serve it with oyster sauce. 194.171.56.13 (talk) 15:31, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

no I mean do you kill it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.80.28.189 (talk) 19:48, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Of course the chicken must be killed. Trying to eat it without killing it would be unpleasant and dangerous for you and more unpleasant for the chicken than being killed humanely first. Marco polo (talk) 20:00, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you mean "how", farmers generally use decapitation; they can use special funnels or blocks that the chicken is placed in which hold the neck still. The process isn't perfect, though - just see Mike the Headless Chicken. Laïka 21:01, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You can rely on the fact that Marco Pollo knows what he's talking about. :-) Gwinva (talk) 01:08, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

mike rocks I hate chickens exept for mike —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.222.156.191 (talk) 01:35, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I believe Mike had more of a strut than a rock. His decapitation didn't appear to inhibit his gait too much. Rockpocket 07:39, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Where does the overflow water drain to in the Ladybower Reservoir, as seen in this picture? xxx User:Hyper Girl 15:41, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Into the River Derwent below the dam. If you look at the reservoir in Google Earth, you can quite clearly see the two overflow inlets at the upper corners of the dam, and the outlets below. FiggyBee (talk) 15:51, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, FiggyBee! xxx User:Hyper Girl 16:01, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The rest of the water goes through the 4½-mile Rivelin Tunnel. It's fun to watch it gushing out at the other end.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 16:30, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Once a CD got corrupted when I burned it while playing a game (Windows). This was a long time ago and I think I ran Windows 98 at the time. What was the cause of this, though? The OS? The software? The hardware? Or was it just something that would've happened even if no other apps ran on the same time? I think I used Nero or something. Somebody had warned me that it would fluck up, but I didn't believe it could be that way, since it makes no sense if the OS is multi-tasking... apparently, I was wrong? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.225.50.83 (talk) 15:55, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Buffer underrun used to be a serious risk when burning CDs; basically, the laser couldn't stop mid-burn, and if the computer couldn't pass the burner information fast enough, it would just write garbage and ruin the disk. More modern burners have buffer underrun protection and can stop the laser, so it's not as much of a problem as it used to be. FiggyBee (talk) 16:03, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The computer desk is good for this type of question. As FiggyBee said: burning a CD, especially on an old computer, requires a lot of processor power to copy the original data from the hard drive, covert it, and burn it to the disk. Playing a game also uses these resources of the computer, and the CD-R drives buffer wouldn't have gotten the data in time to burn it to the disk. Think outside the box 16:10, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This property where doing something in a timely fashion is part of the correctness of the system is what real-time computing is all about. General-purpose operating systems just aren't made to do it, although the problem can be alleviated with brute force (big buffers, fast processors, etc.) --Sean 16:23, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure if this is the right place to get the question answered but here it goes.

The apparent owner of an institution that has been called a diploma mill by some authorities has a user account, user_talk:Bircham. They are understandably unhappy with the Wikipedia article Bircham International University. They have complained a number of times. The complaints have involved numerous misleading statments. However, I feel that we should still diligently investigate every point they make. Here is their most recent complaint, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Bircham_International_University#Neutral_Point_of_View.3F with some responses from a couple of different editors, including me. The problem is that their points 5 & 6 require an understanding of spanish to verify. I don't know spanish. Can someone that knows spanish please investigate these points? I would really appreciate it. Thank you, TallMagic (talk) 18:19, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You might also try the Spanish Wiki Embassy. --Sean 22:42, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I'll wait a few days and if there's no response here then I'll try there. I don't want two people working on the same thing. :-) Thank you, TallMagic (talk) 00:19, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll help you. There's a lot of reading needed so give me an hour or so.--Yamanbaiia^{(free hugs!)} 00:23, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have heard that back in the day, NASA used "analogue" simulators. How was this done? They apparently used video cameras and a model of the moon and the camera physically moved around with advanced, elaborate setups. Please link me to a video of this or an article or something. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.225.50.83 (talk) 20:01, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here is a bit of an article about analogue flight simulators, which was where I came across analogue simulation in the mid-late 1970s. I will try to find you something more related to moon landings! SaundersW (talk) 20:28, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here is a chapter from NASA's history on the use of simulators in the various missions. No good diagrams though. SaundersW (talk) 20:36, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And here there seems to be an account and a photo of the facility used to practice landings, which has been given national monument status. SaundersW (talk) 20:41, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In this article there is a link to a photo of the Landing and Ascent facility where the camera and plaster model were located, beside the LM Mission simulator. Have fun reading all this lot! SaundersW (talk) 21:06, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I know two people over the years who have gone through the process of naturalizing, my mother and grandmother. Neither of them was given the test. My mother was asked the name of Bill Clinton's dog. So I'm curious is there any discussion on how the citizenship test seems optional? From what I read, it seems to be mandatory.-128.54.77.37 (talk) 20:03, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

According to United States nationality law#Naturalization, everyone has to take the test. It's probably not optional for the person demanding the citizenship, but the officer might be able to give the person an easier test or none at all.--Yamanbaiia^{(free hugs!)} 20:39, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I took it in 2004. It was short and extremely easy; I think the hardest question was "how many branches does the US government have?". I'm a native-level English speaker and look white, so I don't know if that affected how it was administered. Perhaps if I'd had a bushy beard, he would have asked me in what order the states ratified the 12th Amendment. --Sean 22:52, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And would have rejected you if you were able to answer? Makes the most sense since the people who would know that shit would be the most likely ones who have incidious motives to be come US citizens :-P The rest would just go 'screw this shit' and go somewhere where they aren't treated like shit Nil Einne (talk) 16:12, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think I know what one of your favorite words is ;) Poechalkdust (talk) 19:50, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I want to go and see Lytton Strachey's house, Ham Spray House (Wiltshire, England), but is it open for tourists? --Yamanbaiia^{(free hugs!)} 20:31, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately not, the grade II listed building and estate is still owned privately. Foxhill (talk) 21:23, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

But many such properties which aren't regularly open to the public in the way you mean are sometimes open in other ways, for instance for one or two days a year as part of the national gardens scheme, or else for events for local groups. You could try contacting the Hungerford Historical Association - they should be able to give you an idea of any possibilities. Xn4 21:12, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

i have been just recently seeing human rights violation (things) such as

gender inequality

mistreatment of homosexuals

immoral acts such as adultery,rape,

child abuse

domestic violence

where can i find more about these issues?

i ACTIVELY want to work for human rights?

what shall i do? and is there any website or group i may call in pakistan (i live in pakistan) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.128.4.231 (talk) 21:10, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

To find more about this issues, check out the articles on: Gender inequality, LGBT rights opposition, Domestic violence, adultery, Rape and Child abuse. See also Human rights in Pakistan. Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International have more information about Human Rights in Pakistan. I'm sorry i can't be of more help, maybe someone that knows Urdu will be able to give you more information on who to contact in Pakistan.--Yamanbaiia^{(free hugs!)} 21:56, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

what are the requirements of citizenship of countries such as iran?kuwait?n other gulf states n please tell specially about iran n india? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.128.4.231 (talk) 21:13, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia has an article for Indian nationality law and i found a vague answer here for Kuwait. Here it says that it's almost impossible to become a citizen of Kuwait, specially if you are not a Muslim.

When it comes to Iran, here it says that ...foreigners might become Iranian citizens within the regulations. Their citizenship might, however, be denied once they are either accepted as citizens of another country or file an application for the citizenship of any state. The prerequisites for gaining Iranian citizenship, are:

1. The applicant should be 18 years old.

2. Five years of consecutive or alternate residence in Iran is required.

3. The applicants should have served their military service.

4. The applicants should not be convicts of any major crime or non-political offense in any country. Of course, given the revision of the nation's Penal Code and the elimination of such terms as offense and crime, Paragraph 4 of the Civil Code Article 979 should likewise be revised. It should be noted, however, that the government might refrain from granting Iranian citizenship to aliens either on account of political reasons or for the protection of national security. The admission of such applications might, therefore, require the Cabinet's approval.

Once you become an Iranian citizen, you would not have the same rights as regular Iranian citizens of descent blood (Iranian citizenship is determined by blood, not by country of birth like in the United States), you cannot practice law, become Majlis deputies or members of the Guardian Council, or provincial and urban councils as well as president.--Yamanbaiia^{(free hugs!)} 21:37, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

When you shoot somebody with a gun from "near", does the bullet actually make the body fly backwards, or have movies been lying to me? If not from one bullet, maybe from a machinegun? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.225.50.83 (talk) 21:48, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Per conservation of momentum, the most a gun could push someone back (if the bullet transfers all the energy to them) is the same that it pushes back against the shooter. Notice how the shooter doesn't fly backward? Neither would the person being shot. Nearly all movie depictions of guns are silly inaccurate for this and several other reasons. Friday (talk) 21:52, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Friday above. It is also worth noting however, that even though the kinetic impact of the bullet may not push one backwards, one may still collapse to the ground due to the pain or the psychological shock of being shot. Acceptable (talk) 21:55, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

But the individual shooting a gun is 'prepared' for the power so their stance is likely to be stronger than someone who perhaps isn't expecting to be hit? For instance here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MlFlXMHaSVQ) shows people being pushed-back by the force. Now I agree that a bullet would give a lot less push-back but I don't think it would be impossible to imagine someone being knocked back by the power of a gun-shot - though not to the dramatic extent that you see in movies/tv no doubt. ny156uk (talk) 22:00, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Recoil does exist, certainly, and it's sensible that being prepared for it could make a difference. Also, someone might jump upon getting shot, making it look like the bullet pushed them around. A big factor to consider here, tho, is that the more powerful the gun, the more likely it is the bullet will zip right through a person, thus not exerting as much force on them. Friday (talk) 22:09, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have shot pistols before with my feet together, thus "not preparing" myself for the recoil and I was not pushed back at all. However, I have never fired guns with larger recoils, such as a shotgun, from this position so I wouldn't know about that. The Youtube video posted was an example of an extremely powerful catridge, the .577 T-Rex, which has almost 10 times as much energy than a standard 5.56mm NATO. Acceptable (talk) 22:17, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe if the shooter was using a shotgun, like Acceptable mentioned, since the pellets are more spread out would they exert more force on the body (instead of going through it) ... possibly knocking them backwards? --72.69.145.183 (talk) 22:57, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but the best you can do is still limited by the force that was exerted on the shooter. And, a shotgun is pretty darn mild recoil compared to a monster cartridge like mentioned above. Friday (talk) 23:03, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just to add my above was pure speculation i've no idea about recoil/power, just remember having seen some you-tube vid of people being pushed-back by the power. The guys above certainly sound like they understand the effects much more than me ny156uk (talk) 23:17, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just do add a little more, suppose if a light person was wearing several layers of bulletproof vests and was shot by a powerful .50 BMG from a anti-material rifle from a point-blank range or by a 20mm round from an aircraft cannon, I think it's possible for them to be knocked over by the kinetic energy from the bullet. Of course, this is assuming that the bullet doesn't penetrate and that the multiple layers of vests will be fairly low in mass. Acceptable (talk) 23:39, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This really should have been asked on the Science Desk. But anyway, I just want to point out that the bullet's impact on the victim is not necessarily equal to the recoil in terms of force or in terms of kinetic energy. It is necessarily equal in terms of momentum — provided that the bullet does not pass through the victim and has not yet lost signficant speed due to air friction. If either of those conditions applies, then of course the momentum transferred to the victim is less.

The article on the .577 Nitro Express bullet for elephant guns cites a mass of 750 grains (about 48.6 grams) and a muzzle velocity of around 2050 ft/s (625 m/s). If the shooter is a smallish person weighing say 50 kilograms, the recoil would therefore be enough to put their whole body in motion at about 2 ft/s or 60 cm/s. In practice, of course, most of the recoil would impinge on the body parts holding the gun, delivering quite a kick — but not enough to throw the whole body backwards. Likewise for the victim, with the further note that such a large bullet at high speed would be very likely to pass through, thus reducing this particular effect. So even with a gun that big, what you see in bad movies is impossible.

--Anonymous, edited 02:25 UTC, January 26, 2008.

On generic TV cop show, generic forensic female scientist (the one in the sterile white bubble clothes) tells the generic all-knowing male detective that when shot, the body would not have arced dramatically, spun around or landed elsewhere – it would just drop. (Can't remember where or when, they all seem to run together somehow.) Sounded boring enough to be convincing at the time. Julia Rossi (talk) 08:09, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It may be a bit late for this response, but MythBusters thoroughly debunked the "fly backwards" bit of this, all the way through the .50 cal rifle idea. Bullets were able to knock the dummy off the quick-release stand (demonstrating force transfer) but wholly unable to push the dummy backwards. Most of the position change was the result of how the dummy's knees buckled. If I recall correctly, armor plate was used with the .50 cal to ensure that it didn't pass through and instead fully transferred its momentum. In other ref-desk staple news, I'm hella excited for this week's put-an-airplane-on-a-treadmill episode! — Lomn 20:24, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What are some home remedies for Poison Sumac?--76.176.130.141 (talk) 22:34, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This might interest you; it would be appropriate to scroll down to the "Treatment" section. Good luck. --72.69.145.183 (talk) 22:51, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How were audio tapes mass produced? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.225.50.83 (talk) 22:34, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

When? A more specific time or time period would be helpful if you want a complete answer to this question. --72.69.145.183 (talk) 22:49, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For compact cassettes Cassette duplicators were used running at ~10 times the playback speed.--TreeSmiler (talk) 01:05, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

still available! [2]--TreeSmiler (talk) 01:07, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Try Loop bin duplicator. Poechalkdust (talk) 20:01, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Employer is paying JLC rates. What does it mean? Aligatorek (talk) 23:26, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

JLC rates are decided by independent Joint Labour Committees (of which there are 17) comprised of worker and employee representatives. These rates are legally enforceable minimum wages for given sectors, it would appear. More information here and here. Angus Lepper^{(T, C, D)} 23:35, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

When the stated printing resolution of a printer is listed at 600 x 600 DPI, it means that there are 600 dots across and 600 dots down of ink per one inch of paper. But what does it mean when the printer is rated at 4800 x 1200 DPI? If it means that there are 4800 dots across and 1200 dots down, wouldn't the inch be stretched rectangularly? Acceptable (talk) 23:33, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The inch wouldn't be stretched (the inch itself is the same length, regardless of the number of dots therein). Rather, it would have a higher resolution in a given direction. Much the same as taking an inch and marking it off in quarters, and placing an ink/pigment/toner dot there, or marking it off in sixteenths and doing the same. Angus Lepper^{(T, C, D)} 23:36, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

But what would the advantage of having more inches dots across the width than keeping both width and height the same? Acceptable (talk) 23:56, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not more inches, more dots (I can foresee an intention where I could have misunderstood you, it would have to be a fairly obtuse wording). OR, but I'd suggest that it's probably easier to boost resolution in one direction than it is in another (through the quality of motors available to feed paper/drive the head back and forth or the like) and so you achieve a higher overall resolution (in terms of dots per square inch) at the loss of symmetry. I'll do a little searching, but this could be tricky to phrase in such a way as to get useful results from a search engine! Angus Lepper^{(T, C, D)} 00:12, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A search for asymmetrical resolution turned up this comment, which mentions that having a higher horizontal resolution means printed text will have more even looking vertical stems and less jagged italics. So if a manufacturer can only afford to increase resolution in one direction, it may be better for them to increase the horizontal resolution. --Bavi H (talk) 06:08, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Im a British citizen, however I qualify for Irish citizenship, through my gradparents. Would it be worth applying for it, other than for the reason of not losing it? I suppose what I mean is can anyone think if there is any benefits to it (monetary, socially, travelling-wise (as in easier visa's for places) etc etc) that i'm not already entitled to through the whole EU stuff. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.64.96.154 (talk) 00:14, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is, apparently, significantly less expensive to get a visa for some countries as an Irish citizen than as a British one - Russia, for example. I have also heard that, in the current international climate, Irish citizens receive a friendlier welcome and have a generally easier time travelling in some countries (all original research, I'm afraid and I'm too tired to look for reliable sources at the moment). I've experienced situations where people aren't quite sure where Ireland is (I'm Northern Irish), which I suppose could be good or bad... Kateshortforbob 01:28, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, if you want to travel to China, for instance, a single-entry visa from the embassy in London costs £65 for US citizens, £30 for British citizens, and £20 for everybody else. -- Arwel (talk) 16:43, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Who holds the FIDE records for wins, losses, winning percentage, and games played?72.50.180.208 (talk) 01:57, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

≈how do i get a trainee job in this field in he subject line? I am working on my master degree in occupational health and environmental study in grad school now.

I have been working in the safety and environmentao field for my californida state job for over 10 years . P

Thanks for your time in reading this question. Please direct me to somone who will take the time to work with me in finding a job in this field in which i love to do. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bobcatjim (talk • contribs) 04:31, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

question moved from the Help Desk. --The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 04:40, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My Question is: 1. Why do you think that OFW's are considered as the present heroes of today? 2. What is the importance of the OFW's today? 05:52, 26 January 2008 (UTC)210.185.184.170 (talk)

We, the respondents here, don't think those things. The question, I'm guessing, was why do you think these things? To help you answer these questions, you could start by reading Overseas Filipino and the links from that article (e.g. [3]). Good luck. Rockpocket 08:32, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why do I keep seeing commercials for Boeing and Lockheed Martin? What sort of audience would they be attempting to reach when their primary customers are airlines and militaries? Bellum et Pax (talk) 06:37, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you're not going to buy one of their planes, but you're probably going to fly in one at some point. I suppose they want their passengers to know how great a job they are doing, and that their products are safe. Adam Bishop (talk) 09:04, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Business to business advertising is relatively common. Rather than simply advertising in trade-magazines and business-newspapers it make sense for businesses to also use mainstream tv to raise the profile of their company. It can reach a bigger audience, it can be more inventive/have more appeal through tv than simply photographs. Businesses are run by people and people watch tv. One of the most important roles of advertising is making your name 'known' so that it has the potential to be considered. Now it would seem insane that a company like Boeing might not feature in the mind of a business when they are considering aviation companies, but the advertising will keep it fresh in their mind, 'sells' them the idea of safety or of quality, maybe even of them being 'bigger' than other firms (even if perhaps they are not). See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_marketing ny156uk (talk) 09:23, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Another thought-provoking case is Intel's "Intel inside" campaign. And then there's mass-market advertising of prescription drugs... —Steve Summit (talk) 15:15, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You might also want to check out the excellent documentary The Corporation, which touches upon this phenomenon. A section of the film is devoted to what is referred to as "Perception Management". While business-to-business advertising may be a small part of it, ny156uk, its purpose is primarily for the public's... well, I won't go so far as to say indoctrination but there is definitely a goal of softening the image of the corporation in the eyes of a public it may not be directly benefitting (and in some cases is actually harming). Poechalkdust (talk) 19:58, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In the case of airliners, note that some members of the public may choose airlines according to which airlines (or which flights) use Boeing planes, which ones use Airbus, and so on. If Boeing's advertisements induce more people to fly on the airlines that mostly use their planes, then they'll tend to order more of them and Boeing will benefit. --Anonymous, 22:30 UTC, January 26, 2008.

Another role for this sort of advertising is to make you interested in buying stock in a given company. --Sean 16:50, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A long time ago, runnin Windows 98, somebody on IRC or ICQ chatted me up and asked me what "very-specific-filename.jpg" was. I had taken this picture with my Web camera of a meal of noodles. Somehow, he had got access to my HDD. I instantly got chills on my back and instantly wondered what else he had seen and if he had write/delete access as well...

I don't quite remember, but I MIGHT have had been to my first "LAN party" at that time (those were the days) and the rule there was to "share your entire C:". So, I might not have turned that off. However, this person was not on the LAN, and didn't appear Swedish either, since he could not understand the filename (which was in Swedish), and the filename kind of sounded in English like it would be a nude picture (but was not, luckily). I don't know if he thought it was perfectly OK to snoop around on my (apparently) free-to-the-Internet system, or if he just wanted to scare me by asking the question out of the blue.

In either case, I have not trusted Windows ever since. How could this possibly happen? Why was my entire system shared to the Internet? And how did he find it? And how do you connect remotely with a Microsoft network anyway? So many strange things associated with that OS... I'm really scared to this day. Ideas? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.225.50.83 (talk) 09:14, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure how it happened -- I don't use Windows, for various reasons -- but this tale rather nicely illustrates one of the fundamental issues in computer security.

Sometimes, of course, having your files shared with other users is useful, and is precisely what you want to do. If you wanted to share files, and if file sharing was turned off, and if the technique for turning on file sharing was arcane, you might find it difficult or impossible to achieve your desired result.

Historically, Microsoft's philosophy has been to make it as easy as possible for you to get arcane things done. They've made it as easy as possible for you to install any and all new software on your computer. They've made it as easy as possible to have extensions installed in your browser. They've made it as easy as possible for active content in emails you receive to be automatically activated. They've made it as easy as possible for the "right thing" to happen when you insert a removeable disk. I haven't heard of file sharing being globally enabled by default, but (in a Windows environment) the possibility doesn't surprise me too much.

Critics and naysayers will suggest that by making all of these things so easy, Microsoft has also made it easy for miscreants and ne'er-do-wells to install and run various kinds of malware on your computer, against your will. But what's so wrong with making it easy for you to do what you want to do? What's so wrong with Microsoft's strategy, if it has turned them into one of the most phenomenally successful corporations on the planet? (Don't answer that.) —Steve Summit (talk) 15:10, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, "what's wrong with making it easy for you to do what you want to do" comes down to the "what you want to do" part. If what you want to do is to open a permanent security hole—sure, why not let you do it? But if what you want to do is to share some mp3s with people and NOT open up a permanent security hole, but doing the former easily leads to the latter, then Microsoft is making it easy to do a lot of things you don't want to do without realizing it in the process of doing things you want to do. I'm of the belief that anything should be optional in an OS but that things that expose your to bigger problems should require higher tech knowledge to even do—want to open up your computer to malware? Fine—but you'll have to muck around in RegEdit a little to do it. Sound a bit too scary for you? Then you probably shouldn't be opening up your computer to malware. --24.147.69.31 (talk) 18:15, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Windows file/printer sharing is a NetBIOS service, and these days NetBIOS normally runs over TCP/IP. This is what you want if you're on a firewalled managed LAN, but it's very bad if you have a public IP address. Windows Firewall (which was introduced with XP SP2) blocks NetBIOS ports by default. In earlier version of Windows you had to explicitly unbind the file sharing service from the network interface (in TCP/IP properties) to get it to go away.

It's also possible that this had nothing to do with Windows file sharing and it was your chat program that was at fault. Many IM-type programs have file-sharing features built in, and it might be that through a bug or misconfiguration this person had access to your whole C: drive that way. -- BenRG (talk) 18:37, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My dad is convinced that if you use a metal knife to take out the toasts from the toaster (AFTER it has "popped up"/finished), you will get electrocuted. He constantly tells me I must use a wooden. I always use the metallic one anyway (since it's less work). I'm convinced he's living in the early 1900s or something when this might have been the case in toasters. These days, surely they are not sending out electricity like that? I highly doubt I will get an electric shock even if I put my fingers on it or indeed use a metallic tool while it's "running" (toasting).

What do you say? Please enlighten me. I admit I somehow fear that he might be right. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.225.48.80 (talk) 10:08, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You can buy wooded tweezers for this job, why take the risk and prove your father right!?--Johnluckie (talk) 10:14, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(ec) My brother once knocked out the house's electricity doing this (with a wooden-handled knife) </OR>. I'd advise turning off the toaster at the socket before you start poking metal things into it. Algebraist 10:16, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The response so far seems to be "better safe than sorry." But I still feel the OP's question is not really answered...how great is the actual risk of sticking a fork in a modern toaster? Is it possible that the electrocution danger is an urban legend?--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 14:20, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Once the toast has popped up, the heating elements (the orange / red glowing wires) no longer carry an electrical current, and in theory it should be safe to stick a fork, knife or you fingers in there without risk of shock. HOWEVER! Never stick anything into a running toaster! You will get a nasty shock, and if you're electrical supply isn't fused, it could kill you. Even modern toasters use electrical currents to work. Think outside the box 14:26, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Important correction: for "isn't fused" (which is never true in the modern world) read "doesn't have a GFCI" (which is often true). A fuse protects against currents big enough to start a fire; a GFCI (called by various terms in various countries) protects against currents big enough to kill you, which are much smaller. --Anonymous, 22:37 UTC, January 26, 2008.

IF the toaster has a polarized plug and IF no one has defeated the polarization and IF the wiring to the polarized receptacle is all correct and IF the toaster internals are all working correctly, it MIGHT be safe to stick a conductive object in a toaster that is not toasting; USUALLY you'll only connect yourself to the neutral wire of the mains power and that's USUALLY safe. You wanna count on all those ifs, mights, and usuallys or would you rather just unplug the toaster before messing about with it? I know which choice I would make.

Atlant (talk) 14:33, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Atlant's right. The OP's father is exaggerating somewhat -- it's not guaranteed that if you stick a metal object into a toaster you'll get electrocuted -- but it's unquestionably quite dangerous.

Here's the issue: those glowing wires that create the heat that toast the toast are, rather obviously, electrically live when they're on and heating. There's no practical way to insulate them -- any electrical insulation would also tend to serve as heat insulation. So sticking a metal object into a toaster when it's on is right out.

What about when the toaster is off and not toasting? How likely is it that the toasting wires are not live? Well, as Atlant suggests, the issue is whether the hot or the neutral side of the circuit is switched. It's supposed to be the hot side that's switched, and if the plug is polarized that's supposed to guarantee that the hot side is really the hot side, but as we've seen, there are a lot of "if"s involved. It's quite possible for those wires to be (thermally) cold, with no electricity flowing through them, but for them nevertheless to be sitting at a high potential voltage, just waiting for an alternative circuit to be completed through a metal knife or fork and a careless toast lover's body.

If I were a safety regulator, I'd insist that both sides of the circuit be switched (that is, both ends of the nichrome wire be disconnected from the wall when the toaster isn't heating), for precisely this reason. But I've never heard of that actually being a requirement.

I have heard that toasters are deliberately not grounded. The thinking is that if you do go and stick a metal object into a toaster (which, of course, some people are going to do), you're actually more likely to get shocked if the metal body of the toaster that your wrist is resting against is grounded, than if it's not. —Steve Summit (talk) 14:57, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've always figured that toasters are one of those appliances that give regulators nightmares. I mean, the thing, given its function, almost has to be designed in such a way as to render it inherently dangerous, both from the points of view of the risk of electrocution and the risk of fire. The one change I suppose I'd make if I were the Chief Regulator would be to require a GFCI-style plug on the toaster, much as hair dryers are now required to have in the U.S.. But that would probably increase the cost of the toaster by 50% while halving its reliability. Toaster ovens at least use CalRod-styled heaters where the exteriors of the heating elements are (at least theoretically) insulated from the mains connections. But as Steve Summit observed, that electrical insulation makes the Calrod heaters much slower to begin working than the bare nichrome wires in a toaster.

Atlant (talk) 17:49, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have a Philips toaster. Its outer body is all plastic, although there is a metal frame inside, which is accessible around the toast slots. I just tested it by unplugging it and holding one probe of an ohmmeter across both prongs of the plug. I pressed the other probe against the metal frame, then against the resistance wires, then against other metal parts in the heating area. No current flowed. Conclusion: this toaster does indeed use a double-pole switch to ensure that no parts are electrically live when it isn't operating. The plug is unpolarized, which makes sense in view of that design.

Perhaps Philips has tighter standards than some companies, or the Canadian standards that it has to meet are tighter than US ones, as I've sometimes heard. (British standards are reputedly tighter yet.) It was, by the way, made in China, something that didn't even occur to me until I looked just now — such is the power of brand names. --Anonymous, 22:54 UTC, January 26, 2008.

That's all quite fascinating. Perhaps you guys can answer a question for me. If a domestic appliance (specifically, a fax machine) is plugged in and turned on, and a child decides it is a fun idea to use a pair of metal scissors to cut the dangling cord, what sort of shock (if any) would they get? (nb. The child I have in mind did not do this; he elected to cut up the neighbouring telephone cord instead). Gwinva (talk) 19:01, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The last time I cut through a power cord (apologies for the OR here), the only shock I got was one of surprise, at the loud noise, shower of sparks, and sudden cessation of the lights. Typically, whatever metal implement you use to do the cutting will short across either the hot and the neutral wire, or the hot and the ground wire, resulting in a quick, hard short circuit which blows the fuse or trips the breaker just like it's supposed to.

With that said, however, if you were unlucky, and well grounded, and in good contact with the metal tool you were cutting the cord with, and the cut happened to go through the hot wire first, without impinging on the neutral or the ground wire, you could get a nasty shock.

Moral: don't cut through live wires. :-) —Steve Summit (talk) 20:27, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, well, the scissors were kept locked up for some time afterwards... Thanks. Gwinva (talk) 20:30, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A metal object could damage inside the toaster though making it dangerous in future.hotclaws 23:52, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No one has mentioned the conduction of heat yet. Because metal conducts heat well, if you are holding a metal implement in the toaster and the heat travels up the implement and onto your hand I imagine you could be burnt. Less serious than death by electrocution, but still painfull. RobertsZ (talk) 16:08, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If its dangerous to use metal in a toaster, why isn't it dangerous to use metal pots on an electric stove? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Diletante (talk • contribs) 04:02, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good question. There's a clue in one of Atlant's postings above: electric stoves generally use "Calrod elements" (a term I hadn't heard before -- thanks, Atlant), where the resistive heating elements are encased in an electrically insulating but thermally conductive way. —Steve Summit (talk) 05:55, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And now the thing I want to know is "How the heck do they make CalRods?" Manufacturing them (whilst securely, repeatably) maintaining the electrical resistance seems like a pretty good trick, especially if the nichrome element has to have a high-ish resistance. Maybe I'll have to cut a few apart and see if any design tricks are obvious.

In my imagination, one creates the nichrome helix, packs the magnesium oxide powder around the helix in a nice uniform way, closes some sort of "transfer tube" around the helix+powder assembly, and then uses a piston to drive the powder+helix assembly into the final stainless steel (or whatever) CalRod tube and finishes the ends. But that seems hoaky and faiilure prone to me so I'll bet it's done some much different and more-clever way that I'm not thinking of. Maybe the MgO binder is sintered into a sort of a solid around the nichrome so that the assembly holds together better during "packing" into the final container tube. 'Guess I'll have to Google around...

Atlant (talk) 13:13, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am putting in a brick hearth but cant find any instructions.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.165.84.97 (talk) 19:39, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(E-mail removed to prevent spam.)

Atlant (talk) 20:33, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I googled "laying a brick hearth" - results include this[4] and there are FAQs. Julia Rossi (talk) 22:29, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone have a step to step guide to cults. Something that really lays out how they begin, how people are lured in, how finances and housing works It always amazed me how seemingly talentless cult leaders are able to get loyal followings. So if you know of any books that lay the really nitty gritty of how a cult actually grows and functions that be great. Case studies work too. --Alxcgn7 (talk) 22:27, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, our article cult is pretty solid, and provides a very long list of books and articles at the end which you could consult if you want more information on the subject. -Elmer Clark (talk) 03:36, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The book Join Me is quite an entertaining look at how cults can start - indeed, the tag line is "The true story of a man who started a cult by accident". Laïka 10:13, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Does anyone have any idea what animal this could be? I suspect it's a boar, but I'm not 100% on it. Odd skull (imageshack). Froglars the frog (talk) 23:19, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

According to this[5] it looks like a bear skull. Maybe that's what you meant to say? Richard Avery (talk) 08:19, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, looks to me like a bear, but the lower jaw is not aligned correctly, giving it an underbite look. Google Image search "bear skull" and you'll see a lot of very similar looking skulls. The nose and the teeth are in particular indicative. If you Google Image search for "boar skull" you'll see it looks nothing like it—boar are prey animals and have sideways facing eyes (to avoid predators); bears are predators and have binocular vision and thus forward facing eyes (just a quick way to tell the difference in terms of skulls). --24.147.69.31 (talk) 15:00, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Does anyone here read the reference desk solely for entertainment purposes, as I do?

I visit it about once a week; the Misc. desk usually has the funniest questions/responses.

Some of the ideas are fascinating to learn about, but more often than not, the misc. desk makes me laugh more than learn!

Thanks, --67.177.170.218 (talk) 01:10, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I pretend to read it for educative purposes, and of course it's entertainment! ---Sluzzelin talk 04:33, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, yeah, I do that too sometimes. --Ouro (blah blah) 07:02, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There certainly are some witty folks around here. The funniest page on Wikipedia, though, has got to be Wikipedia:Talk page highlights. Whenever I feel stressed, I always read that and have a chuckle. Rockpocket 07:29, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ha! I hadn’t seen that one. Wikipedia:Unusual articles is also quit amusing although not tagged as wikihumor. --S.dedalus (talk) 08:22, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I look at the new entries at least twice a day. Ok, I know that I should get out more! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnluckie (talk • contribs) 11:02, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It eats up time like nothing else. But it is funny. Gwinva (talk) 20:31, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone notice the commercials ? They're getting 2 by 2. Too damn stupid and too damn many of them. Just seen a Burger King commercial, and it was idiotic shit. What is the most stupid commercial YOU have seen ? Wikipedia is NOT censored. 65.163.113.170 (talk) 09:01, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What does "2 by 2" mean? Like it or not, TV commercials are made by people who have worked in advertising for many years. They know what they're doing. That Burger King ad may not persuade you to go in there next time you're hungry, but you can bet your boots it will others, otherwise it would never have been made. And don't post diatribes here. --Richardrj ^{talk email} 09:06, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

THAT IS NOT A DIATRIBE AT ALL ? HAVE YOU SEEN THE COMMERCIALS LATELY ? SOME OF THESE ARE REALLY BAD, SUCH AS ONE SAYING YOU CAN SPRAY SOME SHIT IN A DOG'S WATERBOWL AND IT STOPS THE DOG'S PAINS !!!! 65.163.113.170 (talk) 09:24, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, 2 by 2 means too damn many AND too damn (whatever you're complaining about). 65.163.113.170 (talk) 09:26, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and do not post in all caps and bold, as this is a) frowned upon, b) considered shouting, c) not polite really. And keep in mind that ads (especially tv ads) are made for the less-than-average Joe that needs someone else to decide for him where he should eat. --Ouro (blah blah) 09:28, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think he posted in all caps and bold to reinforce the notion that it was NOT A DIATRIBE AT ALL. —Steve Summit (talk) 14:49, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The ratio of ads to programme time is what is getting much worse. I tune out the sound, look away and by the time the programme has returned I've forgotton what it was all about!--Johnluckie (talk) 10:59, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well most '30 minute' shows run for around 22 minutes, so if you get 2 shows in one hour that should make for about 16 minutes of advertising. Advertisers will have a key demographic they are aiming for - what is stupid and terrible to you may be funny/appealing to their key market. Advertisers are aiming at millions of people it's unlikely everyone will approve of them. The most 'stupid' adverts are generally those that try to be funny/have comedy but don't quite get it right (at least in my opinion) - but for me the worst adverts are injury-lawyers and debt-consolidation ones. ny156uk (talk) 13:25, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Always during lunch. Ads are one of the reasons I stopped watching tv altogether. --Ouro (blah blah) 16:02, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My wife often uses Fairy to wash tomatoes and other vegetables before cooking them. I am converned however that active chemicals which Fairy is made of can be dangerous for health. I believe that putting that liquid on the tomato skin makes it absorb it and then you can not easily get rid of it by rincing anyway. Could anybody shed some light onto this issue? Is there any real threat or am I just paranoic? 88.112.249.11 (talk) 09:43, 27 January 2008 (UTC)Andrey[reply]

I also wouldn't do it, these are chemicals after all. As far as health safety is concerned, better to just wash/rinse them with tap water before cutting/slicing/dicing/cooking. --Ouro (blah blah) 09:46, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Ouro - but a splash of ordinary vinegar in the water bowl helps to kill off any predators and freshens the veggies up. 81.145.240.42 (talk) 10:34, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Predators"? Corvus cornix_talk 00:41, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It probably is a bad idea to wash vegetables with dish detergent—but what does "these are chemicals after all" mean? Water is a chemical too, you know. -- BenRG (talk) 11:34, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I meant to say they're fairly unfriendly chemical substances if swallowed (any residual traces left on/in the to-be-washed veggies apply). I know water is a chemical, too, but quite safer overall than washing-up liquid, not? --Ouro (blah blah) 11:53, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Procter & Gamble has set up [a web site] for product safety information. The EU-regulated safety data sheet for the Fairy Original liquid tells that "Repeated exposure to low levels (e.g. residues left on dinnerware) will not cause adverse effects." However, ingestion of the liquid as such can cause nausea, vomiting and diarrhea. In case of ingestion, you are supposed to drink water to dilute the liquid. You can draw your own conclusions on whether you want to raise your intake higher than the level you already get from dinnerware. Personally, I wouldn't worry about it. 84.239.133.86 (talk) 14:22, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It makes you think who they got to drink it to see what the result would be :) --WebHamster 15:03, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A modified version of the song I'm forever blowing bubbles quickly comes to mind.--TreeSmiler (talk) 00:37, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

HMM article title has wrong capitalizations I think I'm Forever Blowing Bubbles--TreeSmiler (talk) 01:16, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not.--Koncorde (talk) 22:48, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If your wife really wants to use some sort of soap on fruits and vegetables, I'd recommend hand soap as it's much gentler and much less toxic than dish detergent. —Angr ^{If you've written a quality article...} 18:14, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just seen on the news that a rogue satellite will hit this planet. Seen it on FOX News during Obama's speeches, then no futther news on that matter. the satellite has lost power, propulsion. It is due to hit Earth on Jan 28-29, 2008.

Wikipedia is one hell of a website. PLEASE DONATE. 65.163.113.170 (talk) 11:00, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I just found out on the news that a satellite had lost power, propulsion, and it will impact on this planet on Jan 29-30. I saw this while watching Obama's speech (it was on a strip that is on the bottom of the TV screen). Saw this on FOX News. Appreciate the help. 65.163.113.170 (talk) 11:28, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

All you can do is duck.--Johnluckie (talk) 10:11, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is one hell of a website. It has helped ME. Please DONATE. 65.163.113.170 (talk) 11:28, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes we heard you the first time. I think most of us know about the 'rogue' satellite and realise that it is extremely unlikely to cause any significant damage at earth groundlevel. And most of us agree that Wikipedia is excellent. Richard Avery (talk) 11:52, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The news about that satellite is hardly secret. I saw it on Google News yesterday, and there are plenty of articles today. —Steve Summit (talk) 15:10, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The news of the satellite is hardly secret, but info about the satellite is still hush-hush right? --f f r o t h 15:56, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Supposably, that means you shouldn't reveal those sensitive details you have. --Ouro (blah blah) 15:59, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps you want to read something on Wikinews, such as Disabled U.S. spy satellite to fall to Earth. Confusing Manifestation(Say hi!) 05:57, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Am in Kenya and I want to use virgin mobile, is it possible?please help.am kindly in need.phone no. <removed> serial no.<removed> please connect me to Virgin mobile.YOU CAN CALL ME ON MOBILE NO <removed> KENYA. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.178.100.254 (talk) 11:14, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can you clarify whether this will involve my bank details. Richard Avery (talk) 11:56, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed your personal information - you should not post this on a website as it may fall into the wrong hands. And for goodness sake, don't post your bank details online! Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and it is unlikely we will be able to help you with anything more than general information. You probably need to get in touch with Virgin to activate your phone for use internationally (from personal experience). Their website is here and there's information about using your phone abroad here. If you're already in Kenya and can't get in touch with them, your best bet may be to buy a phonecard - they're reasonably easy to use. Kateshortforbob 14:34, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, that's the UK website - the US one is here. And Richard Avery - I'm sorry, I don't know if your question is related to this one --Kateshortforbob 14:42, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's OK Kateshortforbob, my response was alluding to the Nigerian scam which this question immediately put me in mind of. Richard Avery (talk) 20:44, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Making a joke based on someone's nationality (really just his continent of residence) that's not at all related to the question is not exactly appropriate... -Elmer Clark (talk) 05:46, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah... it does, actually. I'd rather have someone (unsuccessfully) trying a scam than someone stuck in a foreign country without being able to ring home! --Kateshortforbob 22:40, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Finland hasn't more than 5 million people in it, and many of them speak Swedish... how many actually speak Finnish? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.225.51.253 (talk) 13:42, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My 2002 edition of the SBS World Book says 93.4% speak Finnish and 5.9% Swedish (these figures are listed as "official"). A 1972 publication "The Book Of The World" says 92% Finnish and 7% Swedish. A fairly consistent percentage over a 30 year period. --TrogWoolley (talk) 14:23, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Our Finnish language article says the language has about 6 million speakers, but the figure is unsourced. The Ethnologue entry for Finnish says 4.7 million in Finland and about another 500,000 in other countries. —Angr ^{If you've written a quality article...} 15:28, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have been trying to find the book Lolita in its original form for a long time. All I can find in on-line book stores are tasteless new editions with 32x32 JPEG screenshots from the movies scaled to become a "cover". It's insane. I don't even know how that is legal, or how this can be. According to Wikipedia, the original is very tasteful. The same Wikipedia article also shows a "recent cover" which looks really good too, but that one is not available anywhere where I can see. I live in Sweden, so I have mainly looked at local ones like Adlibris.se. Amazon seems to have the same ugly, cheap covers that they couldn't pay me to accept. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.225.51.253 (talk) 16:12, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why? Because they draw the eye when they're on the shelf. And it's pointless to print two covers, one for brick and mortar stores and one for online stores. Dismas|^(talk) 16:18, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to find an old edition of this or any book, you can't look at sellers of new books. abebooks.com (maybe there's an abebooks.se too, I don't know), for example, sells used books, and I bet there are dozens of others who do too. —Angr ^{If you've written a quality article...} 16:30, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't want a USED book! Sheesh! I want the ORIGINAL, printed at any time, unused. Not some cheap remake crap. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.225.51.253 (talk) 16:47, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'd recommend getting the annotated edition [6] which, in addition to having a simple, unassuming cover, has a plethora of supplemental information that really expands upon the whole experience. Since Lolita is the kind of book one would (or should at least) tend to read multiple times, the notations are excellent for a second or third read after you've absorbed the flavor of the prose. Poechalkdust (talk) 17:13, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Used isn't 'remade' it's just pre-owned. Also gotta hope the above is meant tongue in cheek otherwise it's rather mean spirited. Anyhoo here (http://www.fulmerford.com/waxwing/lolita.html#shop) has a lot of different editions. I have no idea which will meet your requirements for cover-quality but they range in cost. This one (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0679410430/waxwing) has a pretty non-dubious cover. ny156uk (talk) 17:07, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The first edition of Lolita (Paris, Olympia Press, 1955) has a plain olive-green paper cover, with an inner rectangular border of a white line and an outer one of a black chain. Inside them in black capital letters are the author's name, the title, and the name of the publisher. Xn4 18:35, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. - I've uploaded an image of this and added it to the infobox. Xn4 19:26, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There's a great "Library of America" edition of Nabokov's works that features Lolita, Pnin (hilarious), and Pale Fire, all great books, in one very fine volume with a picture of Nabokov on the cover. --24.147.69.31 (talk) 19:01, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

copy of discussion from RD/math removed by Meni Rosenfeld.

Please do not cross-post (as it says in the guidelines at the top). If you do not get an answer to a mathematical question on the Mathematics desk, it is very unlikely that you'll get one on the miscellaneous desk.

It seems to me that Lambiam has patiently answered your questions. He says above, "State 1: cat in the first box, mouse in the third box: (1, 3)". --ColinFine (talk) 16:49, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Considering the fact that many Reference Desk helpers, don't frequent the Mathematics desk, and I am still confused, and no one has replied for 2 days, I am posting the above question here. --Obsolete.fax (talk) 16:24, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Don't remove, please discuss in the talk page if you don't agree in the question being here, and state your position there. --Obsolete.fax (talk) 17:17, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Copying this question here is wrong on so many levels that I don't know where to begin. It splits the discussion to several places which is bad for both you and respondents. It is rude to take away space from this page which makes it harder to follow the other questions. It is vain to assume that your question is more important than those of others and deserves copying, cross-posting and bumping. It is certainly unacceptable to continue this after being told not to. And of course, people who don't frequent the math desk are much less likely to be able to help you. A slightly less offensive way to attract more respondents is to simply place a link to the question, which I will do for you - the question is Wikipedia:Reference desk/Mathematics#Stochastic matrix (few questions). -- Meni Rosenfeld (talk) 17:30, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Furthermore, in restoring your question, you deleted my response, which is also contrary to the guidelines. Oh, no you didn't: you just crossposted a complete second copy. My mistake. --ColinFine (talk) 17:46, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed with Meni. It is absurd to intentionally spam a clearly math-related question to multiple desks to try to attract undue attention to it. Despite your request, I am tempted to remove this question (and feel I would be completely justified in doing so), and I strongly suggest you remove it yourself. -Elmer Clark (talk) 05:50, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

When did priests first start to wear 'dog collars?

86.27.92.178 (talk) 16:32, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Our article on clerical collars discusses this in some detail. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 16:36, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm trying to find some good websites for comparing the cost of living in different locations. I've found two reputable sources (http://cgi.money.cnn.com/tools/costofliving/costofliving.html and http://salary.monster.com/CostOfLivingWizard/layoutscripts/coll_start.asp) but I was wondering (a) which one would you believe if the two of them show substantially different results for the same location and (b) if anyone can recommend additional good-quality websites for this purpose. Thanks so much! --24.211.242.80 (talk) 19:26, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You might see if the U.S. Department of Labor has a standardized way of doing this on their website. I've used their cost-of-travel estimates for calculating grant proposals and things like that when visiting different cities (it costs a lot less to visit some cities than others)—even that data, while not quite the same thing, would tell you quite a bit in terms of relative cost of living. --24.147.69.31 (talk) 03:24, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Im a huge felix castor fan, just finished "dead mans boots" and wondering when the next one is released, it says 2008 so its this year, but does anyone have an idea when? early, late, april, september? any info will help thanks

Rob —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.68.253.24 (talk) 21:11, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I came to remember an incident a few years ago, where a TV camera caught on tape some ammunition (or similar) exploding inside a coalition Paladin. Does this have its own article, or are there details mentioned anywhere? It was said that there weren't any casaulties, but I remember the blast looking awfully massive. Thanks in advance. 81.93.102.185 (talk) 23:48, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• http://www.hnabooks.com/product/show/6266
• http://www.hnabooks.com/images/sites/9/look_inside/Q081099285X/081099285X_s4.jpg
• http://www.hnabooks.com/images/sites/9/look_inside/Q081099285X/081099285X_s5.jpg
• http://www.hnabooks.com/images/sites/9/look_inside/Q081099285X/081099285X_s6.jpg
• http://www.hnabooks.com/images/sites/9/look_inside/Q081099285X/081099285X_s7.jpg
• http://www.hnabooks.com/images/sites/9/look_inside/Q081099285X/081099285X_s8.jpg
• http://www.hnabooks.com/images/sites/9/look_inside/Q081099285X/081099285X_s9.jpg
• http://www.hnabooks.com/images/sites/9/look_inside/Q081099285X/081099285X_s10.jpg

These airplane belly pictures are almost plan view. You can even see the ground-touching areas of the tires.

You can dig a deep and large hole in the ground and hang the Boeing 747 on a very tall tree to take these pictures.

You can put the Boeing 747 upside down, and take the picture from a helicopter.

Well, I don't think these methods are practical.

Did the photographer take several hundred pictures and stitch them together in a computer? -- Toytoy (talk) 03:13, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Or you could just lay on your back at the end of a runway and take pics of the underside of planes as they land. And seeing that some of these images show landing gear and flaps extended, i'd imagine that's just what he did. Foxhill (talk) 03:26, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Uncontrollable light condition, engine exhaust, control surface movements, landing gear angle, ... . There can be all kinds of problems. If I were the photographer, I may setup multiple cameras at different places and take as many shots as possible. All these factors may still ruin my pictures. I am skeptical to this theory. -- Toytoy (talk) 04:40, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No doubt there is a great deal of skill and luck involved, otherwise his work wouldn't be so widely renowned. Some extracts from news coverage - "Jeffrey Milstein, a New York based photographer, has a recent series entitled Aircraft, large-scale photographs that are not of model airplanes but rather of incoming planes outside of LAX [...] Outside the fenced field, he waits for approaching airplanes and snaps crystal clear shots of the incoming beasts."[7] and [8] says the only alteration he made was to replace the sky with a uniform white background. Something he himself admits to - "I take the pictures near the end of the runway, mostly at LAX. I use a 39mpxl digital back on a Contax 645. I use Photoshop to remove the backgrounds, and I print limited edition pigment inkjet prints in 20″x20″ and 40″x40″ size, which sell in my galleries in NY and LA."[9] Foxhill (talk) 05:41, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My first thought was that they were models, but then I read what Foxhill wrote... takes a lot of patience I believe. --Ouro (blah blah) 07:13, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I found other photos. [10] [11] [12] [13] Enjoy! Oda Mari (talk) 18:39, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Wiki contributors,

I recall being told that Galileo conducted an experiment where he showed that two balls of different masses fell at the same speed towards the ground. I know this may sound naive but, with that logic, does that mean a 300 lb man can use the same parachute rated for a 180-lb man? If so, then you should also be able to drop a tank from the sky with the same parachute?

Also, I recall reading that terminal velocity for a human body falling is somewhere less than 200 mph. Why then, did Joseph Kittinger reach speeds of 600 mph when he was doing his landmark world-record skydive?99.240.177.206 (talk) 03:26, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No. Speed is not the same as momentum which is speed and weight. If the parachute is going to change your speed it has to be able to change your momentum.

Joseph Kittinger was skydiving from an astonishing 19.5 miles up. I imagine the air is a lot thinner up there, resulting in a higher terminal velocity. APL (talk) 03:55, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The air is a lot thinner -- Kittinger needed to wear a pressure suit. See Project Excelsior for more. Also Armstrong Limit -- above about 12 miles the pressure is so low water boils at body temperature. Pfly (talk) 04:42, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure User:APL's explanation makes much sense. What Galileo demonstrated was not that all objects fall at the same speed, but that the acceleration due to gravity is the same for all objects. However, the accelerating force of gravity (which we call "weight") is opposed by the decelerating force of pushing through the air (which we call "drag"), and drag increases with speed. When the forces of drag and weight are matched, that is the terminal velocity, and is the speed at which the object will tend to fall.

Parachutes work by dramatically increasing the drag of an object. When a parachutist opens their parachute, their drag increases so it's much greater than their weight. They then slow down until the drag from the 'chute matches their weight. The greater the weight of the parachutist, the less they'll slow down before reaching their new terminal velocity, because the parachute has to generate more drag (which requires travelling faster) to match the heavier weight.

I hope that makes sense. If it doesn't, I'll have a go at drawing a diagram later. FiggyBee (talk) 09:28, 28 January 2008 (UTC) (edit; here is my dodgy diagram). FiggyBee (talk) 13:52, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds plausible. So, in practice, are there different-sized parachutes according to the weight of the jumper, or a single size that is adequate for (almost) anyone? AndrewWTaylor (talk) 14:43, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, different sized parachutes are available. Also, most skydiving parachutes are actually parafoils - as well as vertical drag, they're designed to fly forward through the air and generate lift like an aircraft wing. FiggyBee (talk) 15:07, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"In fact, Kerviel's first portfolio of financial instruments -- in his case futures -- included genuine operations -- but the offsetting portfolio proved to be "fictitious," the bank said." That's the typical explanation. But I still don't understand how 50 billion euros in positions can be concealed. Are there tens of trillions of euros worth of trades moving through the bank everyday? Help me understand.

66.91.224.203 (talk) 04:58, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The bank indicates all controls were violated. As far as I understand, he bought positions and then created "faked" sales document to cover himself. That way, although there were a couple of operations, the balance of the bank was unaffected. Electronically, the bank still had the same amount of money, but in reality, that money was transformed into stock positions. According to the bank article here, French presidential aide Raymond Soubie stated that Kerviel dealt with $73.3 billion (more than the bank's market capitalization of $52.6 billion). Remember that he has been doing that, apparently, for over a year, and that the only way the bank noticed was when he forgot to "sell" what he had bought. -- ReyBrujo (talk) 05:11, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a way to see results of previous eBay auctions? I know there is a completed listing search on ebay.com, but it only goes back 15 days. Is there a website that will go back further (a free website, preferably)? --71.194.241.127 (talk) 05:04, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I know of this one, but it's only for past auctions of vinyl records. --Richardrj ^{talk email} 06:23, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Internet Archive might work for this if you have a specific URL in mind. Recury (talk) 17:52, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please reply to this edit only if you are not a Christian. Please reply to this edit especially if you are a reader or fan of the series His Dark Materials by Philip Pullman. By reader I mean both by someone who is reading it or someone who has read it before.

I’ve heard Christians claim that there are “proofs” and “evidences” for Christianity to be the “one true religion”. Those proofs and evidences include evidences against evolution, evidences that God exists, evidences that what the Bible says is true, and evidences that Jesus Christ is God and the son of God. See the articles Proofs Of Christ And The Bible, Fulfilled Prophecy As Proof Of The Bible, Science as Proof Of The Bible, Proofs Of The Existence Of God, Reasons For the Bible, Heaven, Deity, Resurrection, Creation, Baptism,, Evolution: Evidence For Creation In 6 Days, and Ten Proofs That Jesus Christ is the Messiah.

What would readers and fans of the series His Dark Materials by Philip Pullman think about all those evidences for Christianity to be the one true religion? Would they think they are really evidences for Christianity to be the one true religion? Would they think they really mean, tell, show, and prove that Christianity is the one true religion? If not, then why?

What would Philip Pullman, the author of His Dark Materials, as the author of His Dark Materials, think about all those evidences for Christianity to be the one true religion? What would all the different characters of His Dark Materials, especially those on Lyra’s side, think about them? What would the angels Xaphania and Balthamos think about them? What would Lord Asriel, Mary Malone, and King Ogunwe think about them? Would all the actors and actresses who played all the different characters in the movie The Golden Compass, such as Daniel Craig, think about them? Would they think they are really evidences for Christianity to be the one true religion? Would they think they really mean, tell, show, and prove that Christianity is the one true religion? If not, then why? By actors and actresses, I only mean those who are not Christians and especially mean those who play characters on Lyra’s side.

Have Philip Pullman and those actors and actresses heard about those evidences for Christianity to be the one true religion before? Has Philip Pullman heard about those evidences when or before he was writing His Dark Materials? If so, then what do they think about them? Are they convinced? Do they agree with those evidences?

If you are a reader or fan of His Dark Materials, then what do you, a reader or fan of His Dark Materials, as a reader or fan of His Dark Materials, think about all those evidences for Christianity to be the one true religion? Have you heard about those evidences for Christianity to be the one true religion before? Do you think they are really evidences for Christianity to be the one true religion? Do you think they really mean, tell, show, and prove that Christianity is the one true religion? If not, then why?

Bowei Huang (talk) 06:20, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The reference desk is not a soapbox; The question itself is by no means wrong, but I think you would see better, and more (relevant) answers coming from several christian webforums, especially if you seek the answers of christian people rather than those of anyone else. 213.161.190.228 (talk) 06:54, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The original poster is not asking for Christians to respond; he is asking for non-Christians to respond. However, the links the original poster has provided are all broken links. This was pointed out a couple of days ago when an anonymous person posted the same links at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities#Evidence for Christianity as the One True Religion?, and the links are still broken. If Philip Pullman or the movie cast clicked on those links, they would be firmly convinced that "Internet Explorer cannot display the webpage". In any event, the Wikipedia Reference Desk is not intended for religious debate along these lines. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 07:37, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There are many many reasons why a “one true religion” almost certainly does not exist. If you are genuinely interested you can read about these paradoxes: Omnipotence paradox, Problem of evil, Problem of Hell, Argument from nonbelief, Argument from inconsistent revelations, Argument from poor design, TANG, Theological noncognitivism, Argument from free will, Ultimate Boeing 747 gambit, Occam's Razor, Atheist's Wager. If you just want to start a debate, why don’t you take it over to a chat room like Dawkins.net and I and others will be glad to argue the point with you there. --S.dedalus (talk) 07:42, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment the links provided all seem to work for me. DuncanHill (talk) 10:03, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(In-dent, in-between-post, hope it is OK) This is 213.161 - I very much misread what was written. My apologies for that. As for the request for specific people to (not!) respond, it makes even less sense to me now. At first and second glance it looked like a dare to Christians, and I failed to assume good intent. :) I'll leave this to other Wikipeds now. 81.93.102.185 (talk) 22:02, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You appear to have asked no fewer than 21 questions-which ones are we supposed to be answering? You also ask what the actors and actresses would think and then later specify this is only the actors and actresses who are non-Christians-AFAIK I don't recall any of the cast being particularly strongly in support or against Christianity... Also why limit non-Christians to answer?I'm sure for questions asking about the cast's views and Pullman's views himself,then anyone is just as capable of answering.I'm sure there must be a His Dark Materials forum somewhere where you can discuss this-I wouldn't be surprised if there's already a discussion going... Lemon martini (talk) 11:36, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment A question with the same link spam and the same disclaimer appeared in the humanities desk. APL (talk) 14:20, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You are correct that this had already been mentioned. I hadn't noticed. I withdraw my comment. However, please do not edit the content of my posts. Thank you. APL (talk) 01:30, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You said I have been asking too many questions together. But what if now I'm not going to ask you all these questions, I'm just going to ask you two? They are that what would readers, fans, and the author of His Dark Materials think about those evidences, would they agree that those evidences really mean that Christianity is true, and if they wouldn't agree, then why.

But what about now when I'm not asking people what they themselves think, personally think, about all those evidences, I'm asking about what a special particular specific group and kind of people have something specifically in common either think or would think, probably think, about a particular thing, topic, and subject? I'm not asking you now what your personal opinion is now, I'm just asking what is the opinion other people have or would have about something else. By what those other people think, I mean mostly and mainly by what they mostly, mainly, usually, generally, and commonly think, would think, probably think, or would probably think about them.

Those links are part of the the Answers Book, a website by an Independent Baptist pastor called Keith Piper.

Are there any websites about His Dark Materials where I could debate and discuss about His Dark Materials and about it with others? Bowei Huang (talk) 01:07, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Having previously inculcated Wikipedia with my requests for information regarding callgirls, I feel I must impose on your kind and generous help once more. After careful consideration of the responses to my previous question, I have decided to arrange a meeting with a local callgirl. Please could any of you whom are familiar with callgirls in the Glostershire, England area please provide me with contact information. Once again I am in your debt in this matter, and I look forward to a speedy and detailed reply. Many thanks, Weasly (talk) 11:34, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The backs of local newspapers have a wide range of personal services advertised.Although why you'd need a callgirl in Gloucestershire when you live in Berlin is somewhat of a mystery-it's hardly local... Lemon martini (talk) 11:40, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks you lemon for reminding me to update my userpage. I just came back from Germany yesterday. Thought I would have better luck over there, what with the reputation of German women. But it seems they are as equally unimpressed with me as British gals. Weasly (talk) 12:21, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Any relation to Wesley Wyndam-Pryce, by the way? —Tamfang (talk) 01:46, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I can just share my only sexual experience. She was not a prostitute, but it felt very awkward and I was not horny at all. I felt disgusted for days afterwards. She actually came to my place, for free. She was older than me, though. I suppose a young hottie will be better for you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.225.48.218 (talk) 12:23, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please explain how one can procure a callgirl for free. Weasly (talk) 12:25, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

She wasn't a callgirl. I met her on a dating site. The one time that worked. Nobody has replied to me since, and I have now given up on ever finding a girlfriend. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.225.48.218 (talk) 15:00, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've heard that joining the Society for Creative Anachronism can help. —Tamfang (talk) 02:00, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would recommend caution in your intended activities, Weasly. According to Prostitution, prostitution is illegal in England and Wales. This would make finding an appropriate person more difficult. We would hate to be seen as encouraging illegal activities. Good luck to you in terms of your search for fulfillment, however. (the Australian SCA has the same reputation, to a degree, BTW) Steewi (talk) 02:31, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

When I was a kid, I saw an episode of "DuckTales" which I recorded. It was the one where they actually go into (far distant) outer space to some sort of "robot planet" where they melt metals (and Scrooge's coins).

In one scene, Fenton faces the "main frame", which is a huge, stationary computer and the robots' leader, with mechanical arms on the sides. When it realizes that Fenton is actually a human/duck/non-robot, he gets curious and starts undressing him against his will. I was scared but very fascinated by this as a kid, and now I think it may have been my first sexual fetish, despite my very young age. What do you think, and is this fantasy/fetish called something? (Being in control by alien robots.)

Also, while I'm mentioning DuckTales: Is it normal for kids, like me, to think that they thought out, produced, drew and finalized every episode of such animated TV series every week, just in time for it to air on TV? I seriously thought that. :$ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.225.48.218 (talk) 11:59, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No clue on the fetish question, but on the latter question, yes, it's common for kids to be totally baffled as to how slick products are produced and to come up with their own explanations. --24.147.69.31 (talk) 13:51, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I had a quick, non-expert look down the list of paraphilias, which mentions robot fetishism and xenophily (in the sense of attraction to alien beings); perhaps surprisingly, there is no mention of an undressing-related fetish. Hassocks5489 (talk) 20:09, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There was a time when I understood about actors but not about stuntmen or blanks, so I wondered how all those actors killed on Superman got paid. —Tamfang (talk) 01:44, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Is this cartoon going on the air live?" "No, Homer. Very few cartoons are broadcast live, it's a terrible strain on the animators' wrists." Adam Bishop (talk) 04:12, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

At least one animated show - South Park - is thought out, produced, drawn, and finalized every week. -Elmer Clark (talk) 23:57, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you attach your feet to a big metallic platform which is dropped from high up in the sky with an air plane, and then you jump from it, straight up, a few meters before it crashes into the ground, will you survive? If not, why not? Makes sense to me. Or am I missing something? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.225.48.218 (talk) 12:02, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think you're dramatically overestimating the power of human legs. Your jump would only slow you down by 1m/s or less (and some of that would be absorbed by pushing away the metal, of course), so if you were falling at 50 m/s you'd still hit the ground at 49 m/s. FiggyBee (talk) 12:13, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(after edit conflict) In short, no. It was tested (although with a slightly different setting) in Mythbusters, see MythBusters (season 2)#Elevator of Death. You will be falling at terminal velocity (roughly 195 km/h) and the speed you generate upwards from the platform won't be anywhere near that. - Dammit (talk) 12:15, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have time to attempt to calculate it now, but intuitively I would expect the terminal velocity of a "big metallic platform" to be significantly greater than that of a human falling free. If so, your impact would be even worse than if you just jumped out of the plane by yourself. --Anonymous, 17:01 UTC, January 28, 2008.

Your legs can produce enough energy to jump about two or three feet in the air if you really work at it. Discounting air resistance, that should be enough energy to counteract a fall of two or three feet. The difference between falling 100ft and the equivalent of 98ft wouldn't really help you. APL (talk) 14:06, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This analysis is invalid. Work is equal to force times distance, where "distance" is what your center of mass travels during the time it has force applied on it. This is different when you are falling than when you are on the ground. The correct simple solution is in terms of velocities. -- Meni Rosenfeld (talk) 17:02, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It works if you're Bugs Bunny. —Tamfang (talk) 01:41, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Maybe I am hallucinating here, but what the hell am I reading? USA and Sweden (and probably many other countries) have INSANE amounts of money "borrowed" (from where?). I don't get this at all. How can there be any other priority than trying to pay these money back? USA apparently has TRILLIONS in debt. This, in my world of raw logic, means that both USA and Sweden should be a third-world countries if they'd just pay the money they owe others.

1. Why did they borrow these amounts? 2. Who lends money to a country? And why? 3. Why am I the only one who is confused about this? If I'm a billionaire who owes several billions to somebody, I am not a billion but somebody who should be living at "minimal existence" terms.

This is madness. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.225.48.218 (talk) 12:21, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Have you read Government debt? This seems to answer some of your questions (for example the money tends to be borrowed in the form of things like Government bonds and Sovereign bonds). 130.88.151.203 (talk) 12:51, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also List of countries by public debt may be of interest. It appears that Sweden isn't actually that high up in the list. 130.88.151.203 (talk) 12:54, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Loans are a pretty normal part of 99% of individual's financial lives - be it for cars, for houses or for other things. What reason would it be 'odd' for governments to have them? Additionally when you take out a loan to purchase a home you don't focus purely on paying that back as you have other obligations, other wants and needs from life. Similarly government has other priorities and other things to deal with. Loans can provide quick access to funding that may not be possible without changing taxation/stimulating the economy - such loans if well used can actually make the economy grow more quickly and end up having a positive effect on the lives of that country's citizens. Debt gets a bad name (particularly in the current climate) but well managed debt serves a purpose in almost all walks of life - from individuals to businesses with billions of dollars in turn-over, to governments that work on budgets running to the trillions. The basic reasoning is broadly the same, the amount and what it is spent on, dramatically different. ny156uk (talk) 23:56, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also 'national debt' is not a 'bad' thing, as if the government is in credit that means the people owe the government. All credit must have a debt back at it. If a country is in debt its because people have been used by the government to do work. Also most counteries debts are way over rated. For example the US debt isn't that bad. A change of government can change things alot. For example Clinton had the US debt $400b profit per year, bush has it 500b loss per year. Getting out of trillions of dollars debt isn't impossible and can happen quickly.--155.144.251.120 (talk) 02:29, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My neighbours upstairs are very noisy. I can hear their every footstep on their laminate floor coming through my ceiling. I live in a ground floor flat. They are above me. What can I do? I live in London. Is there any legal action I can take? Weasly (talk) 12:34, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Berlin, Gloucestershire and now London; you certainly do get around. Try talking to you neighbour first (if your on a friendly basis, that is) and they'll probably be happy to keep their noise down, if they can. If not then you may be able to take some form of legal action. Acording to this "You can also take legal action yourself through the magistrates court under Section 82 of the Environmental Protection Act. You do not need a solicitor and it need not cost much. You will need to prove to the magistrate beyond reasonable doubt that the problem you are complaining of amounts to a nuisance." Also have a look at these 1 2 3. Think outside the box 13:21, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't this legal advice? Do we give legal advice now? --Ouro (blah blah) 13:42, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, quoting from a BBC article and giving links about noise issues in the UK counts as "legal advice". --24.147.69.31 (talk) 14:57, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If all you're hearing is them walking about, there is no legal action you can take against them. I guess you'll either have to move flat, get some earplugs, or help them with the cost of a carpet.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 13:56, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You might talk to your landlord about it, though I doubt they'll care. I am sure there are ways to make the building more soundproof but they are likely expensive. --24.147.69.31 (talk) 14:58, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You don't say, so I'm wondering if you've actually talked to the "perpetrators" about this. Chances are they'll be reasonable about it, put themselves in your shoes (metaphorically speaking), and do what they can (which may not be much, admittedly) to minimise the noise. I'd be surprised if any legal proceedings could get off the ground if this step hadn't first been taken. And you never know, you might make some new friends. -- JackofOz (talk) 20:21, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Soft furnishings 'soften' noises so you could try adding a rug to your room/more soft-furnishings. I know it is coming from the ceiling but it should deaden it a little. Also as the above state speaking with the people is the only fair way to (at the least) start trying to resolve the issue, if things persist then you may want to try take it further. You could fit sound-proofing in your rooms but this may be expensive. This problem, however, is the curse of living in apartments/flats that have people on floors above you. It is one of the reasons that ground-floor living is usually slightly cheaper than the higher-floors (that and street-level noise). Good luck ny156uk (talk) 23:51, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The online computer store cpumart.com seems at first glance to have invested a lot in its user friendliness. However, at the bottom of the page there are four links on the "Help & Support" category which are all broken or empty (note that the "discussions forum" provides no facilities for posting messages) and have been for several weeks. When I emailed them with questions about this and other things, I never got any response. Does anyone have a clue how can such a site afford to be so sloppy? -- Meni Rosenfeld (talk) 17:13, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

They;re alomst certainly using a generic template for a selling site - and just need to add their logo/product details/colour scheme. The contact details will be there by default - and they forgot/didn't notice/care to change them. All in all that means one less person to employ/hire and no doubt the saving are passed on to you the customer... Why they didn't respond to your e-mail - don't know - maybe it went in the junk if you weren't already a customer - perhaps they only respond to essential mail ? Did you check they were still in business?87.102.67.145 (talk) 13:58, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have no reason to believe they are no longer in business (though if their average customer is anything like me, they pretty soon will be!), but don't know how to check for sure. I find it unacceptable that any business would aribtrarily screen legitimate customer requests for support. Oh well. Thanks for shedding some light on this. -- Meni Rosenfeld (talk) 18:43, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• http://www.google.com/
• http://www.google.com/logos/lego08.gif

What day is today? I don't see an explaination on their logo page.

• http://www.google.com/holidaylogos.html

I know Google's founders loved Lego, but is today a Lego holiday? -- Toytoy (talk) 17:32, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you mouse over the logo at http://www.google.com/intl/en/ it says "50th anniversary of the Lego brick". —Angr ^{If you've written a quality article...} 17:32, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yep. From Lego: "The modern Lego brick was patented on January 28, 1958". -- Meni Rosenfeld (talk) 17:34, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I read in The Guardian last Saturday that there are 62 pieces of Lego for every person in the world. Presumably this refers to the amount actually produced. Good to see that we have managed our resources so well. And BTW whose got my 62? Richard Avery (talk) 18:56, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I didn't realize they were yours. I will send them right away, as soon as you provide your address and personal identification details such as social security number and credit card number & security code. -- Meni Rosenfeld (talk) 19:01, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I got waaaaaaaay more than 62. I wonder whose else's I have? —Steve Summit (talk) 19:30, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mine--Johnluckie (talk) 21:40, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think I can account for a couple as well. :) bibliomaniac15 05:00, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why can't you opt out from the ads in Windows Live Messenger? I hate those f***ing ads. Customers should have the ability to pay to get rid of them. Especially since it's a Microsoft product... Please think before replying. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.225.48.218 (talk) 17:54, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I refuse to think before replying. You could use the patch from mess.be, although using it to remove the ads does violate Microsoft's EULA. FiggyBee (talk) 18:29, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is what I mean by thinking before replying. I'm not gonna run some random EXE by som guy who runs a pro-Islam Web site. Besides, this is besides the point as I just wanted an official solution. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.225.48.218 (talk) 18:44, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pro-Islam site? Doesn't look much like one to me. 83.147.139.108 (talk) 13:13, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So, as you obviously already know there's no official solution, is this another non-question question? FiggyBee (talk) 18:53, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think people are a bit edgy today on the non-question issue. I think it is perfectly legitimate to request general insight about how the world works (my own latest question falls into this category). Suggestions about possible reasons for Microsoft's decision would be appropriate here. -- Meni Rosenfeld (talk) 19:05, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If this were a free-form discussion forum, then I'd agree without reservation. But it's not, and I don't. --LarryMac | Talk 19:06, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You could hire a programmer to do the same thing the "guy who runs a pro-Islam web site" did. Disabling functionality is generally straightforward, so it might cost as little as $100, which presumably is in the ballpark of what a "Windows Messenger -- Ultimate Messaging Experience Edition" would cost. --Sean 19:34, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(Can i ask a side question? Has anyone ever been proseceuted for breaking the EULA by modifying MSN Messenger?)RobertsZ (talk) 21:47, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think they even have a way to find out if someone's using the patched version. And if they do sue someone, it's gonna be the distributor of the patch, not some random users. I am not a lawyer, but I think you're safe. Admiral Norton ^(talk) 21:59, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There's always free, open-source alternatives like Pidgin (software) or aMSN, just to name a few. --antilived^{T | C | G} 23:03, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, sorry this is a pretty trivial question but i can't think where else to ask it without getting useless answers. Basically i have a few spots on my face which dont seem to go, so i want to know if i am washing properly. I usually wash my face when in the shower with a facewash in the morning by getting my face soaked rubbing in the facewash and then thoroughly rinsing it. I dont think there is a problem there, however when i wash at night i wash in a basin n my method may be questionable. I fill the basic full of warm water n 'dunk' my head in so my face is wet and then apply the facewash and once its rubbed in i rinse in the same water then add some more water to rinse my face a little better. I usually wash like this everyday. Is washing this often good? Is the way i wash in the basin helping? Is washing my face in the shower helping? Thanks for any comments

212.140.139.225 (talk) 22:38, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I heard that first washing with warm water, then doing what you usally do, then ending with cold water is useful. The effect of the warm water is to open up the pores, which can be more thorougly cleaned by your usual method and then rinsing with cold water at the end closes the pores to stop dirt getting in. Although i did hear this from a friend (not a particuarly reliable source) it sounds sensible to me. Also some acne during puberty is perfectly natural, but as always if concerned go see a doctor. RobertsZ (talk) 22:59, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would think at night, rinsing with fresh, unused water would be best. If it is acne that you are concerned about, a more effective approach would be to buy some anti-acne cream from a pharmacy. If that doesn't work, see a doctor and he/she will be able to prescibe to you a more powerful anti-acne cream. Acceptable (talk) 00:01, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry to hear you are troubled by this problem. I don't think the way you wash your face will affect the acne to a great degree. It is a good idea to wash your face gently with a good unscented soap and then use a skin cleanser or pharmaceutical anti-acne preparation. The way you dunk your face is relatively unimportant, washing your face in the shower is fine. None of what your doing is likely to make your acne worse. If it is really important to you to have a clear skin then go and see your doctor. Richard Avery (talk) 08:25, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I realize that this may require some OR but what I'm wondering is if Geta are actually comfortable to wear. They don't seem very comfortable to me. Dismas|^(talk) 22:44, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have no original research to offer, as I have never worn them, but Walking in Geta offers some thoughts, a clip, and "Although neither difficult to walk in, nor uncomfortable, they're definitely not your Reeboks!" ---Sluzzelin talk 02:34, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've only worn them once, and for a short time. They weren't uncomfortable, as such, but were an entirely different footwear experience compared to the western-style shoes we're used to. I imagine that one would accustom oneself to the feeling relatively quickly. Steewi (talk) 02:47, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm... Thanks! The above mentioned link was interesting, especially so with this statement: Eventually our seemingly infinitely adaptable bodies learn this new (totally unnecessary) skill. Totally unnecessary!  :-) Dismas|^(talk) 03:21, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've just acquired a pocket watch from 1903 that runs beautifully, and since I've never owned anything with clockwork before I have the following questions:

1. How often would I have to take my watch to be oiled and such so that it always runs in perfect condition?

2. How do I know when I've wound the watch up all the way?

3. Can I adjust the position of the hands while the watch is wound and running?

4. If the answer to question 3 is "No", is it possible to "unwind" the watch or will that damage it?

Thanks in advance! Chris16447 (talk) 23:01, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just from what I've read; 1, every couple of years. 2, you'll feel a distinct increase in resistance. 3, yes. On most watches, you pull the crown (the winding knob) out and turn it to adjust the hands, then push the crown back in. On others, there's a lever somewhere which switches the crown from winding to adjusting. FiggyBee (talk) 23:12, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If this watch is high-quality or otherwise especially valuable, you will (a) certainly want to take it to a reputable jeweler for assessment and maintenance, who will also (b) be able to answer the rest of your questions!

—Steve "trying not to make jokes about 'the RD cannot offer horological advice'" Summit (talk) 01:11, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly useful to know: if you're ever taken prisoner and held as a POW, you can safely store an antique watch intra-rectally. --Sean 23:19, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

hi there,

i have just read a fantastic book called 'arrested development', which is the story of lorraine and aaron cohen, who ended up on death row in a penang (malaysia) jail for heroin trafficking. i am curious as to how they are travelling today and whether they have finally beaten their addiction(s).

I tried a google search but the only link that was of any help was some new zealand true crime book site, which was waaay out of date anyway.

any help or links would be appreciated. lorraine or aaron (or friends/family) if you happen to be reading this (long shot I know!) I would love to chat and swap stories. I was deeply moved by your account. I have taken the wrong path myself on my life journey and am thankful that it never led to imprisonment, but I know from where you speak.

many thanksDavelicious (talk) 23:23, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Let's say you've got some meat or produce that's supposed to be eaten within four days of purchase. On the fourth day, you put it in the freezer. When you defrost it, does the clock reset -- do you get another four days to eat it? Or do you have to eat it right away? -- Mwalcoff (talk) 00:14, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, first of all, those "clocks" are hardly precise. They generally say "best before Jan. 31", not "Must absolutely be eaten before Jan. 31 at 23:59 (UTC) or else you'll turn into a toad." So if it said four days, you probably have at least eight days before it starts tasting really rank, regardless of whether those days are interrupted by a stint in the freezer.

With that said, there are a number of factors that affect the answer:

1. Are we worried about the food going stale, or about it being contaminated by microorganisms?
2. If we're worried about microorganisms, are they killed by freezing? If so, we can say the "clock resets". If not, it certainly does not.
3. If we're worried about the food merely going stale, then clearly freezing it does not "reset the clock", as freezing is not generally a way of making stale food taste fresh again. Moreover, depending on what kind of food we're talking about, freezing doesn't necessarily even preserve freshness -- there may be damage due to freezing, particularly if the food is left frozen long enough to suffer freezer burn.

—Steve Summit (talk) 01:05, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes and no. Per Steve's comment, 'best before' dates are approximate guides—food that's been properly handled and stored will often still be safe to eat well after the given date (though I've had the odd product that is visibly spoiled 'early'.) There's no hard and fast rule, and you should always be alert for signs of spoilage. (How do you know some minimum-wage slacker didn't leave a shipment of meat out in the sun on the loading dock for a few hours while he took his 'lunch' break?)

Freezing will stop or greatly slow the growth of all microorganisms, and will kill many (but definitely not all) of them. So to an extent, the clock is partly reset. What freezing won't do is eliminate any toxins that have been secreted by foodborne pathogens. Our article on foodborne illness discusses the wide variety of nasty chemicals secreted by or released from the bugs that can contaminate our food. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 14:04, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any type of wood furnace out their that allows you to get electricity for your house? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.119.61.7 (talk) 00:36, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Its done on a commercial basis [14] but I cant find anything on domestic generators. —Preceding unsigned comment added by TreeSmiler (talk • contribs) 01:34, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Google search "home wood burning furnace." -- Mwalcoff (talk) 03:09, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I tried your google search, Mwalcoff, and it didn't work. The question is about making electricity from wood, not about making heat from wood. --M@rēino 05:35, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You could always stick one end of a Stirling engine in your furnace, and run a dynamo offf it. DuncanHill (talk) 20:00, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you can raise steam from burning wood, you can use any old steam turbine generator to generate the electricity.--TreeSmiler (talk) 22:56, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Where can i find a list of the most densely populated islands in the world? Together with repective data for population density? I can't find an article on wikipedia, nor can i find much googling. kawaputra^torque 05:38, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

According to worldislandinfo, Ap Lei Chau is the world's most densely populated island (60,000 inhabitants per sq km). Malé is the most densely populated unbridged island (40,000 per sq km). The smallest island with over one million inhabitants is Manhattan (only 26,000 per sq km). No real "list" though, sorry. ---Sluzzelin talk 05:55, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We have List of islands by population and List of islands by area. Cross reference those and you can calculate a List of islands by population density. Rockpocket 05:59, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, this seems to be what you want. Rockpocket 06:01, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That list is interesting, but very incomplete. It seems to only list islands that are involved with the United Nations Environment Programme. Manhattan, for example, is missing. --M@rēino 14:11, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes the list seems incomplete as it also omits Ap Lei Chau. But still useful. Thanks. I may just create that page when time permits. :) kawaputra^torque 15:38, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Has Joe Arpaio considered running for US President ? 65.163.113.170 (talk) 07:50, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The reason I asked is that some claim a "common sense" approach to crime, terrorisim is greatly needed. 65.163.113.170 (talk) 08:00, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

He appears to be publicly backing Mitt Romney, which would suggest he isn't thinking of running himself this time around. [15] Rockpocket 08:15, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank Ghu. Corvus cornix_talk 22:33, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Has there been a presidental candidate that usually wears glasses while campaigning? They all seem to start wearing them after they win. --Niyant (talk) 08:56, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Woodrow Wilson, Theodore Roosevelt. Teddy's glasses actually helped save his life by slowing an assassin's bullet when he was giving a campaign speech! Rhinoracer (talk) 13:35, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• The bullet hit his glasses case (and also the speech itself, which he hadn't yet started giving), but I don't see anything to say that his glasses were in them. Presumably he had them on. --Anonymous, 03:10 UTC, January 30, 2008.

• Also, Truman is wearing glasses in the most famous campaign victory photo of all time. From a historical perspective, it's important to remember that the big alternative to glasses, contact lenses, didn't make major inroads until the development of oxygen-permeable materials during the 1980s. --M@rēino 14:18, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Synchronicity time: Truman's daughter Margaret died yesterday. -- JackofOz (talk) 03:25, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What does this expression mean? Saw it in a 1960s episode of The Twilight Zone. Does it mean to send a telegram or something? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.225.48.218 (talk) 13:47, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It means exactly that. FiggyBee (talk) 14:10, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Telegrams were sent by wire, hence the expression.86.200.5.16 (talk) 14:43, 29 January 2008 (UTC)DT[reply]

To send a message by telegraph--TreeSmiler (talk) 22:58, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I work for a company that manages toll roads, and the other day some of us were trying to figure out what's the longest toll road in the world. The Pennsylvania (U.S) Turnpike (532 miles long in three sections http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pennsylvania_Turnpike) came to mind, but we thought there must be something longer elsewhere in the world. A search of Wikipedia and Guinness Book of World Records failed to turn up any citations. As I continue to research this on my own I thought I'd see if any of Wikipedia's volunteers had any info or suggestions. Thanks.Mearch (talk) 14:33, 29 January 2008 (UTC)mearch[reply]

The New York State Thruway is supposedly the longest in the US and the World. FiggyBee (talk) 15:03, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The International Bridge, Tunnel and Turnpike Association has a global list of toll facilities here. Some of the numbers for (mostly under-construction) toll roads in China are much larger than the figures above (4000, 4400, 5200 miles, etc). --Sean 15:11, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why doesn't that spy satellite have built-in TNT that can be remotely activated?

If no electricity works, it should auto-explode if it doesn't get a signal in 30 days or something. A mechanical one which ticks down and is winded back with an electric arm. If it doesn't, it explodes (its lost).

Why don't they think of these things before firing it up in space?! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.225.48.218 (talk) 15:12, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The problem with that would bethat instead of having 1 satellite breaking up in the atmosphere, you would add to the already huge amounts of space junk in the atmosphere. Vagery (talk) 15:44, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Additionally, it's all still going to crash. Breaking up the satellite won't meaningfully change its orbit, and all the pieces (some still significantly large) will rain down over an even larger area. The normal "think of these things before firing it up in space" is to reserve some maneuvering fuel for a controlled de-orbit, which was certainly done with a military satellite that the US doesn't want recovered by anybody else. Something went wrong. Oops, things aren't perfect. As for the specifics of why a break-up isn't a solution, badastronomy.com discusses the dangers of both light and heavy uncontrolled pieces. Again, note that the common theme isn't size but control, which TNT does not confer. — Lomn 16:15, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As has been pointed out, it is more of a risk to have it blow up in space (and potentially damage all sorts of other satellites up there) than it is to let it crash (most of the planet is just ocean, after all, and much of the land area is sparsely inhabited). --24.147.69.31 (talk) 16:58, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can anyone discover, or work out, the volume of the interior of a 2007 Honda MX-5? The reason I would like to know is because I plan to fill one up to the window-line with rubber ducks. This is a serious question; I currently have a colleague contacting suppliers to price the kind of quantity we would need. Our original plan was to fill the boot only; figures are published on luggage capacity so we know that would have required 150 litres of ducks. Now that we need the volume of the cabin up to the window line, figures are obviously harder to find. I'm hoping the dedicated people here can come up with a convincing estimate so that we know how many ducks to order. 205.205.219.5 (talk) 15:53, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This google search sems to suggest 46 cubic feet. --Tagishsimon (talk) 16:12, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't the MX-5 a Mazda? My rough count suggests about 1500 dm3 ~ 53 cu ft (but I didn't adjust for your up-to-window-line requirement, it's rather for the whole cabin). And we want a photo when it's done. --Ouro (blah blah) 16:14, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, yes, it's a Mazda. Thanks for the quick responses here too. Might I ask how you arrived at your rough count? My colleague is somewhat sceptical (having not seen the power of the Reference Desk as I have) about asking some random people on Wikipedia to make this crucial estimate. Being able to reassure him with an idea as to the method would help. As for the photo, I can't promise to be able to take one, but if I do I'll try to make it available. 205.205.219.5 (talk) 17:17, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, take first of all the measurements from here. I took the given height and width (reduce the height a bit), and about a third of the overall length of the car. That gave me just above 3000 dm3. But that's a rectangular shape, and the car's interior is nowhere near that - so shave off a bit for the seats, angles and I've come to my estimate. It's rough as pumice, though. Cheers, Ouro (blah blah) 18:03, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to get a similar visual effect at lower cost, you could fill the footwells and so on with balloons, and then add a thin layer of rubber ducks to cover them. SaundersW (talk) 18:57, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, that's a very interesting idea - thankyou. The cost of a whole car full of ducks is quite high; we're currently investigating arranging to lease the ducks (or rather, buy with an agreement in place to sell back) but if that proves fruitless then your suggestion might come into play. 205.205.219.5 (talk) 19:58, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I know we're not supposed to give legal opinions, but I must advise you that's it's against all laws of God and Man to fill a person's car with rubber ducks and not take a picture. --Sean 23:31, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

:-) 205.205.219.5 (talk) 09:59, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Noted. --Ouro (blah blah) 12:59, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"There is a bus with 7 girls.

Each girl has 7 bags.

In each bag, there are 7 big cats

Each big cat has 7 little cats.

Each cat has 4 legs.

How many legs on the bus? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.191.136.2 (talk) 17:13, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

None, buses have wheels. --LarryMac | Talk 17:16, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nice. --Masamage ♫ 17:28, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dammit! I got this question wrong on an internet quiz a few months ago and spent half an hour doing multiplication, trying to figure out where I went wrong. Grrrrr. Deltopia (talk) 19:37, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Was this an actual question or were you just trying to see if we would fall for it?--Dlo2012 (talk) 17:28, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For way too much analysis on the time-worn ur-example, see As_I_Was_Going_to_St_Ives. jeffjon (talk) 18:07, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

this is a real question, i have seen riddles on here before and though you people might enjoy this one. there is no bus driver. and the answer is not the same as as i was going to saint ives —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.18.35.90 (talk) 18:11, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Alright, if you say it's a real question.... The number of cat legs on the bus is: 4 (cat legs/cat) x 8 (cats/cat family) x 7 (cat familes/bag) x 7 (bags/girl) = 1568. The number of total legs is unknown, because it is doubtful that girls would be left unattended on a bus -- even if the bus is stationary, the girls are still at risk of harm from the unsanitary conditions caused by almost 400 cats in a cramped space. But it's at least 1568 + (7x2) = 1582. --M@rēino 20:51, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

SPOILER WARNING it is in fact ten thousand nine hundred and nintey —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.18.35.90 (talk) 21:10, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Citation Needed! --LarryMac | Talk 21:12, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I like the one that goes "you're driving a bus with 7 girls, each girl has 7 cats, each cat ... [and so on] ... What color are the bus driver's eyes?". By that time, most listeners have filled their head with enough math to forget that you told them they're driving the bus. --Sean 23:34, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On the assumption that "on the bus" means "in the bus", the answer is what 86.18.35.90 said. Seven bags for each of the 7 girls - that's 49 bags; each bag has 7 big cats = that's 49x7 big cats; each big cat has 7 little cats - that's 49x49 little cats; that's 49x56 cats in total; each cat has 4 legs - that's 49x56x4 legs = 10,976 cat legs; plus the 14 human legs belonging to the 7 girls = 10,990. -- JackofOz (talk) 03:23, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For people who were confused, (as I was) the discrepency between JackofOz's answer and M@rēino's answer is that M@rēino forgot to multiply by 7(girls/bus). APL (talk) 04:50, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why isn't just about every car everywhere "keyed"? It is nearly impossible to get caught and causes a major headache and annoyance for the owner. I personally have never done anything like that, but less than a year ago, I went out with a hammer wrapped in a plastic bag and was going to smash/damage cars in the middle of the night, being sick of society and humanity in general. But I ended up at home again, having not done anything but walked around. I couldn't make myself do it, even though I had many, many perfect chances with not a soul around as far as the eye could see.

Obviously not everyone has that kind of barrier like I do. So how come the civilized world isn't full of damaged property and basically total anarchy? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.225.48.218 (talk) 19:58, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There are many theories as to why people perform malicious acts. But I think it's safe to say that most people are reasonably happy with life in general. --Merovingian (T, C) 20:01, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Have a look at natural law and Jurisprudence. Also consider the logical implications of your question: What 'benefit' do people get from keying a car? Randomly being extremely mean to a complete stranger is hardly the actions of a 'normal' person and brings no benefit to the individual doing it - yet it introduces risks such as... you may be found doing it, you may feel guilty for having done it (social conscience), you may believe that by your doing something it makes it more likely someone else may and eventually it may 'catch up' with you and happen to your car. Personally i'd suggest you speak with someone who can help if you genuinely considered randomly attacking other people's property because of your own state of mind - it is certainly not the actions of someone who is functioning in society perfectly normally. ny156uk (talk) 20:37, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• This New York Times article recently took a swing at the general question of why people exhibit moral behavior even when no enforcement is present. Short answer -- the vast majority of humans appear to be hard-wired for it, most likely because it makes evolutionary sense for a species as extremely social as humans to want to play nicely (or as a Dawkins follower would say, it's The Selfish Gene, not The Selfish Organism). --M@rēino 20:56, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• And while Richard Dawkins may not believe there's an invisible man watching all the wicked little things one does, enough people do believe that to make a significant contribution to people generally behaving themselves. --Sean 23:37, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Personally I doubt fear of God keeps most people from being bad. I have more faith in the power of civil law to control people than the power of religion. People huff and puff a lot about religion a lot but I don't honestly see it keeping most of them from doing what they'd rather being doing anyway. As a case in point, most people engage in "sinful" behavior on a daily basis, but relatively few engage in behaviors that have high legal consequences and a perceived high chance of getting caught on a daily basis. People have lived in communities before formal religion ever came about -- community rules, norms, etc., are probably much more powerful than the literal threats of scripture. --24.147.69.31 (talk) 02:29, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The basic answer to your question is that on an evolutionary timescale humans that could integrate with a social group well had a higher survival rate and passed their genes on. People who committed random acts of violence became social outcasts and died of. Defiantly something to think about before smashing that window! --S.dedalus (talk) 00:28, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Most vandalism that does occur seems to have a rationale other than causing damage. If you tag (graffiti) a bridge, for example, you can look at it every day and point it out to your friends until it gets painted over. If you key a random car, you'll probably never see it again, and even if you come across it again, you have to look fairly close up to see the damage. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 01:26, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why can one buy an archery bow, including bolts, and gloves on ebay, but not a cross bow? What can one do with a cross bow that one cannot do with a compound bow? also, if a country has very weak gun laws such as uSA, if some one sells a gun on ebay, why can i not buy it in the uk? I need a crossbow! A 1.5kg compound bow, 224km/h mmmm, that'll do. but I would like a crossbow. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.18.35.90 (talk) 21:16, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In the UK, the Crossbows Act 1987 prohibits the sale to, or possession or purchase by, a person under the age of 17 of certain types of crossbow. (Stones, 8-22660) Section 44 Violent Crime Reduction Act 2006 increases the minimum age for sale, letting on hire purchase and hiring of crossbows to 18 with effect from 1st October 2007. I'm going to guess that eBay, being unable to vouchsafe for the age of the bidder, refuses to handle the goods. IIRC, that act was passed after a particular crossbow murder somewhere in London ... I think one part reaction and one part concern about the relative accuracy of crossbows drove the legislation ... you almost certainly do not need a crossbow. --Tagishsimon (talk) 21:22, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not that it's terribly important, but FYI, vouchsafe is not a synonym for "vouch" :) -Elmer Clark (talk) 00:24, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. --Tagishsimon (talk) 00:25, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please kindly I request you to e-mail me some islamic duas for my health, marriage, child birth and conception, labor pain ease, For repentance of sins, for studies, education, protection from Bad jinns and species of all the worlds that can cause harm to me - living , non-living, dead, alive, all non-living, living materials, etc., prosperity, success, Respect, love, care , support, good nature, all the bounties of Allah?

[[Email adress removed to prevent spam. 71.117.47.242 (talk)]] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.29.18.124 (talk) 21:55, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps you should talk to your caliph? He can answer the questions better than we can. --71.117.47.242 (talk) 23:02, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Caliph!! Good grief. That title, which confers a unique authority, has not existed since 1924, when the Ottoman caliphate was abolished. Clio the Muse (talk) 23:44, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Although certain Muslim radicals are trying to revive it...Corvus cornix_talk 23:54, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

To the original poster - the Reference desk probably isn't the best place to ask for religious help. Your Imam or prayer leader may be a better person to ask. Best wishes, DuncanHill (talk) 00:04, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can this question be considered as a request for "professional" advice? If so, it should be removed. --Taraborn (talk) 00:56, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Let's not go out of our way to find loopholes allowing us to remove people's questions... -Elmer Clark (talk) 03:57, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Anyway, professional advise is permitted. --Masamage ♫ 04:09, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oops! Shows you how much I know about Islam. Well, at any rate at least I learned something new today, caliphs are to Islam like priests are to Judaism. Haha, next time I will spend a bit more time researching my answer before I post! xD --71.117.47.242 (talk) 05:21, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I often need to use a cold pack for various aches and pains and have tried ice (cons: chipping from a large bag, pointy edges), single-use (I'd get through a lot) or my usual, frozen peas (cons: mushy and kind of smelly after a while). Also, I always end up damp, somehow. I recently read about a flax seed-filled cold pack which sounded good, but I'm having trouble finding anywhere that sells them in the UK. However, someone in my family works in a health-food shop which sells the stuff, so I was wondering if it would be possible to make my own. It's quite expensive, but maybe there's a lower grade for non-food use? Or is there something else that would work for me? Wheat? Rice? Ball-bearings? Any ideas?

(Sorry if I don't reply promptly; my WP time may be limited at the moment.) Thanks --Kateshortforbob 00:17, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AFAIK corn & similar works well, if popped in a bag then into the freezer or microwave - example google search. A UK supplier. --Tagishsimon (talk) 00:21, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have a Dunlop Crybaby, I've had it for a few weeks, and I used it a few minutes ago and my guitar's signal wouldn't go through, and this noise comes out, it's sort of like a siren or bad clarinet playing, or a kazoo play through the small end. What's wrong? Should I return it, and get a cheap auto-wah? Or could I take it to my local music store and have it fixed there? How much will this cost? MalwareSmarts (talk) 00:31, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to ask the obvious, but did you check the battery? If you want people to estimate the cost of repair, it might help to tell us where you're located. --LarryMac | Talk 01:01, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you been using it a lot since you got it, then depending on the current consumption, and the state of the battery when you bought it, it is conceivable that your battery is discharged somewhat. the squealing noise sounds a bit like what you may get with a battery that has gone high internal impedance. Try new battery first.--TreeSmiler (talk) 01:19, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. On Panasonic.ca, I found the SC-AK750 Stereo under home theatres. It's 660 watts. Is this the single most powerful stereo (in North America), anyways?Jwking (talk) 00:44, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is that 110 watts per channel times 6 channels? If so, then the answer to your question is no - here is a Yamaha home theater receiver that supposedly has 140 w x 7 ch (so that might be 980 total?) I don't think total wattage is a big a deal in home theater receivers as it used to be back in the day when we had but the two channels. And we liked it! --LarryMac | Talk 00:58, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I actually read this off of a MindTrap card, but it's still a valid question all the same. Is it possible for siamese twins to recieve opposite rulings (e.g. guilty and not)? Any historical cases? I can't imagine how the sentence would be delivered without some miscarriage of justice. --The Dark Side (talk) 01:18, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There is an old movie, Chained for Life, related to that. I don't think there is a precedent for that. -- ReyBrujo (talk) 02:42, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is a bit different, but illustrates the same principle: According to this website, "On April 2, 1865, Union Major General George Stoneman rolled into North Carolina hoping to draft some of the locals, no matter which side they were cheering for, and the names of all males over 18 were put into a lottery wheel. One of the names drawn was Eng Bunker, but Chang refused to go, and since his name hadn’t been drawn, Stoneman couldn’t force Eng either." Lantzy ^talk 02:53, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Another thing I've wondered: conjoined twins can and do have fulfilling romantic lives by "tuning out" of each other's private moments. But sometimes thetwins are united at the pelvis, meaning they have one set of sex organs. My question is, would you be instantly cheating on your spouse just by consummating the marriage? Would it count as polygamy? Is there any precedent relating to that? --Masamage ♫ 05:27, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it would be "cheating" since the person would agree before hand. It probably would either be polygamy, or only one of the two people would be considered the official spouse. What about a drivers license? As for precedent read about Abigail and Brittany Hensel - they are about to turn 18, and they have a drivers license. Ariel. (talk) 07:28, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dear diary: JACKPOT!. --Sean 14:38, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have the balls to be anything more than a dilettante. So what tropical forest will have the least scary bugs?

Lotsofissues 02:35, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Arkansas. Also got crazy hillbillies. 205.240.146.188 (talk) 07:17, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rainforest Cafe. Or something at Disneyworld, perhaps the Enchanted Tiki Room or the dinner show at the Polynesian Resort.

Atlant (talk) 13:06, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Wiki contributors,

How do I achieve this effect on the hands [[16]] (link is work-safe) with photoshop? The hands look like they have been desaturated and most importantly, a bronze-ish look and glow to them. Thanks. 99.240.177.206 (talk) 02:41, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I found this comment by the artist:

I desaturated the entire image then painted in color back on the watch and places I wanted it, then put a heavy golden filter over it, to give it the bronzy hue, and also used several overlays of texture

Quoted from this comment.--Bloigen 02:49, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I am going out on kind of like a report competition and the subject is Buisness. So, I decided to do one on the Dior company. But there was only about designers'(Christian Dior)informations. the competition is in about 2 weeks and I need to be prepared till next week so that I can fix my mistakes and get helps from my teachers.

I REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR HELPS!!!! THANKS A LOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! p.s. my e-mail adress is(e-mail removed) so can you send Dior information to here? thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.138.50.241 (talk) 08:21, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a good idea to post your e-mail address as it may encourage unwanted attention. Any info or links will be posted here. I hope your competition goes well. Richard Avery (talk) 08:36, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

66.53.214.90 (talk) 08:51, 30 January 2008 (UTC)Any info is greatly appreciated on how to get/apply for another new Top-Level-Domain that will known world wide such that *.com, *.org, etc...[reply]

For example, another top level domain name to be: www.-----.xxx where xxx is a new top-level-domain that I would like to get its certified.

Thank you.≈—

Top level domains are created and administrated by ICANN. .xxx has been proposed before; see the article for the history. FiggyBee (talk) 09:36, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I see you weren't actually suggesting .xxx - still it's an interesting article which helps to explain the processes. FiggyBee (talk) 09:38, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to befriend a little girl (age 5-12 or so), but I don't know how. Modern society makes this nearly impossible. My intentions are not sexual; I simply feel that I have more in common with little girls than any other sort of human (I'm male and 22 myself). I also find them extremely adorable and this appeals greatly to me. I have no natural contact with any "lolis" (no relatives, family or friends with kids). "Getting my own kid" is not an option for many reasons (problems of finding even a girlfriend, let alone a wife, problems with gender/waiting/responsibility/bringing life to this shitty world, etc.).

For some reason, I am considered "creepy" whenever I talk about this. I get sad when I think of all the lonely little girls out there and the lonely little girl lovers like myself who could easily be paired for the benefit of everyone; the girl, me, and her parents who are too busy to care about/spend time with their child. Actually, I would like a little boy to be my friend as well. I could play video games with him and tell him about "the good old days", teach him how to program, etc. But primarily a little girl.

I am talking to a lonely little 9-year-old girl on Windows Live Messenger (she has a Web camera, so I know she's not a faker). She has no friends and her parents seem to use the computer as a nanny for her. They don't seem to care too much. Unfortunately, she lives in a different part of the country, so it's not exactly walking distance. And yes, she should have friends in her own age, but better me than none, right? She appears to be bullied at school. Her only friend seems to have abandoned her. I feel sorry for her, and would like to make her happy. She is just an example, however.

So how am I supposed to get a little friend? It seems as hopeless as getting a girlfriend, which I have given up on long ago. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.225.50.126 (talk) 11:10, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe become a primary school teacher?87.102.77.153 (talk) 11:58, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Or have children (requires wife..)87.102.77.153 (talk) 11:59, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You can't really blame people for finding it creepy when you say things like 'lolis', 'girl lovers' and 'make her happy' and claim pure intentions. Even if this is the case the vocabulary you are using is not suitable to the context of the relationship you are imagining. It makes it all sound like a mixture of repressed desire and rationalisation. I would hope that you can also understand that contact services for older males and younger girls could and would most likely be subject to abuse. I really hope this is just trolling. Lanfear's Bane | t 13:14, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I hope it's trolling too, but (agf) it may just be someone who made some poor choices in vocabulary. Seraphim ^Whipp 13:27, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If a 9 year old little girl was to tell her parents she'd made friends with a 22 year old male, it would ring alarm bells. If you look at it from the perspective of the parent, you'll easily understand that, therefore it is extremely unlikely that you would ever be able to look after a small child that you'd met on the internet. Would you like to take care of children or teach children? Perhaps you should consider a career in either of those areas. In the UK, you need to be "vetted" and need to take a Criminal Records Bureau (CRB) check to get any job relating to children. Seraphim ^Whipp 13:25, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Stop abusing the word "troll", you idiot(s). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.225.50.126 (talk) 13:33, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And there goes the good faith... FiggyBee (talk) 13:50, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is the character/string denoting "null" or "nothing" in a table/output intended for an "end user" (such as a Web page) to be considered a "locale" variable? I suppose "-" is accepted by all cultures and people to mean "nothing is here", no? While "N/A" is an English thing? I have never seen simply leaving the field blank. It always has some sort of "fill character" to show that it is in fact empty. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.225.50.126 (talk) 11:12, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This comment intentionally left blank. Lanfear's Bane | t 13:05, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If your table has a visible border, I would think leaving it empty is acceptable. It really depends on the context, since anything you come up with could be valid for certain data sets, such as for a "Table of Common Markers for Intentionally Blank Data Fields". :) --Sean 14:25, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This made-in-Japan Sony stereo cassette recorder/player/radio from the 1990s appears to have the buttons reversed.

Should not REWIND be to the left with arrows pointing to the left and FAST FORWARD be on the right with right arrows? Also, notice that the PLAY button's arrow is pointing to the left instead of to the right.

This confuses me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.225.50.126 (talk) 11:16, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Another example from commons (Nakamichi RX-505) - Image:Nakamichi RX 505 Front2.jpg 84.69.93.205 (talk) 11:34, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Aren't some Asian languages read from right to left? As symbols then these would make more sense for the user. I have however no idea if the recording / playing mechanism works "in reverse". Lanfear's Bane | t 13:17, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

is it possible that the tape was in fact inserted upside down into the machine? then the arrows would make sense. 83.104.131.135 (talk) 14:38, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. I am in the process of buying a second hand 4 by 4. I am wondering which fuel, either DIESEL, or a converted unleaded to LPG would be a better more economically engin to run. I am looking at a new model turbo intercooled motor, I will be doing an equal amount of city driving and highway driving.

Thank you for your time, and any assistance would be much appreciated.

Damien. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ipl422 (talk • contribs) 12:38, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]