User talk:User9669/archive2

Archive 2004-2005

USA PATRIOT Act controversy

Per Wired News[1], the FBI stated to a Wired news reporter "you're going to have to turn it all over."

I don't have a vested interest in the language either way, as I didn't author that part of the original article, but there is support for the previous wording.

Thanks for taking the time to improve the USA PATRIOT Act controversy article.

Adrian Lamo · (talk) · (mail) · 01:44, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for replying on my talk page.

Based on your comment, are you intending to restore the graf about the ACLU countersuit RE: the USA PATRIOT Act ? I was about to transplant it to a separate section on the controversy page, but if you're working on it, I'll leave well enough alone.

The prosecutions subheading was ambiguous, but I believe it was technically accurate, since the Act was being controversially invoked in a prosecution. Namely, mine, which is why I happen to remember it :)

I've avoided making substantial changes to that section due to my involvement, but forgive me nonetheless if I seem to be nitpicking. Your efforts to increase clarity and accuracy in this area are appreciated.

Regards, Adrian Lamo · (talk) · (mail) · 02:02, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Got your reply shortly after reintroducing the ACLU graf. I reintroduced your edited ACLU text into the transplanted ACLU graf under the "opposition" subhead, and clarified on the article talk page. Leaving the rest of your edits alone.

Adrian Lamo · (talk) · (mail) · 02:10, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. I have to head to work now. I noted on the talk page what I'm currently looking for so I can complete what I feel needs to be in the article. Please let me know if you feel I'm missing anything. --Kainaw ^(talk) 02:16, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Help desk Hall of Fame

I've started a Help desk HoF on my user page. You have the dubious honor of being the first inductee in the Science category. That was hilarious.--◀Puck^talk▶ 23:23, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. I usually get a negative response to my answers. I'm glad to see that someone isn't so serious! --Kainaw ^(talk) 01:17, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

I usually try to be helpful and nice--I do tech support in real life so I know how important it is--but some times they just have it coming to 'em. Other times the set up is just too irresitable.--◀Puck^talk▶ 01:24, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

More Patriot Act

Hey, do you have a moment to peruse USA PATRIOT Act, Title II? I think we might be well on our way to getting the main article sorted out. I'm a bit nervous about the summary of the sections, would you be able to help me check this bit? - Ta bu shi da yu 10:38, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

I will look at it tonight if I have time. Work is finally picking up and I'm spending all day poking around Wikipedia waiting for something to do. --Kainaw ^(talk) 23:06, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Please see

Please see my response to your comment[here]. ike9898 15:21, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Hi :D

Hey... I need some advice and to ask you some questions...I hope you don't mind. first of all... I didn't know that even our MATH (stuff that seems true everywhere, even outside the universe, like 1+1=2)can actually break down some seconds after the BB during it and 'before it' (I'd better say, beyond it, since I guess there's no before it). does our math really break down then? or is it just our physics that do? I'm conffused... also... the advice I need is that I have the bad luck of having been raised a traditional catholic... I have been baptized, have made the 1st comunion and even confirmated when I was 16... but I did because ALL my school does in a group... (yeah I know what you are thinking... I studied in a catholic school) well not really! I have studied in a school that is supposed to be secular...it is secular for peruvian standards... but that means it still is catholic... and I also confirmated because otherwise I'd have had a hell lot of problems with my family... they are more irrational than Kant I'm not even kidding... so I just did it, but when I started to study psychology, I realized I wasn't being true to myself by doing something with which I didn't agree just out of fear and a wish to please my parents and to not be the odd one out ( since most people do confirm, even if they aren't catholic at all inside, and most of them arent! I swear...they think just like me, but are to tyred to defy this freaking tradition and just lead a western lifestyle like I do... I'm not gonna lie and say my parents make me do stupid things or pray all day... I'd have killed myself by now if it was like that... my life is pretty normal...) but they say that 'I'm crazy for going against the current' ...meaning that since the majority is catholic, I'm crazy for not being one! ....hahaa! and ... I'm the nice one! I'm the geek! I'm the one who doesn't smoke nor drink! I'm the rational one! I'm the one who likes sports and music! I'm the one who has a sense of humour and likes to be happy!... and they hate me for that! because, they smoke, they are irrational, they are all emotional and can't control themselves, they are hypocritical, because they too lead a 'secular' lifestyle but go to church on sunday and USE (literally) USE religion to back up their nonsense...whenever they try to give me their nonsense and I dissagree on a rational basis (not that I'm some hippie rebel! I'm a ps. student who is very mature...Iguess)when I do...they always have religion under their sleeve to justify themselves...they go: 'God will punish you' ' god says to honor your parents' ' god doesn't like inquiring minds' 'god blah blah blah' 'our god sucks as much as we do, but you better deal with it'...actually not that one... they would never acknowledge that... but yeah...even my sister has admited to go to church just because like she said it : if I where to tell my dad I didn't want to go, he'd just tell me to F*** off...(I don't go anymore because I have SUFFERED a lot to 'convince' them to accept this...but every once in a while they will get God in the conversation if I'm there, just to bother me, since when I'm not arround, they are normal people Who don't talk about God)... I can't imagine whow would this be if I was gay or something! :| they probably exorcize me... and they have even compared my not accepting their religion with being gay! :|...can you imagine?

I'm really sorry I'm winning and complaining in the talk page of a stranger and wasting your space... but I'm really depressed over this and I think it's taking a toll on my well being... so I just don't know what to do, and I think any kind of sincere advice would be helpful, besides you seem like a really smart level headed person.

ps. thank you for your responses on the reference desk! :D --Cosmic girl 04:52, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

ps. ps. I saw your homepage and I think U rock and I chose the right person to ask for advice...I'm sure you'll understand what I'm going through and feel sorry 4 me ... :( .--Cosmic girl 05:09, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Response is at User_talk:Cosmic girl. --Kainaw ^(talk) 14:10, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Comment

Kainaw, I had no idea of the level of complexity involved here ... I've no doubt committed a sack full of mortal sins unintentionally. I began to feel uneasy as I looked over the main page a little more and have begun the process for newbies. Gotta say though, even that seems a little daunting to a guy creeping up on 60 with very rudimentary computer experience. Anyway, onward and upward. The search for baseline info on Dick Cheney is underway for me and I'll see how it looks for adding to the article once I've digested what I can find. Chinrest 03:12, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

First time I've ever had welcomers popping out of the woodwork in a new neighborhood ... and with useful info instead of green bean casseroles - it's great. I assume that folks will let you know if you're bugging them too much with questions? Haven't done enough of the sandbox stuff etc. to have a laundry list yet, but no doubt will. Thanks for the help Chinrest 16:35, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

RD:Science revert

I want you to know that I wasn't reverting your edit to RD:Science. After your comment on Pluto (according to the edit summary), the page went missing. The history was still there, but clicking on your edit came up with a "page not in database" error. I clicked on the previous edit and it came up. So, I saved that version in hopes that it would fix the page. --Kainaw ^(talk) 14:44, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

I had figured that much - no worries! I think the Wikipedia database was having a really bad day. Thanks for letting me know, though :) — QuantumEleven | (talk) 19:30, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Monty Hall

Hello because I don't think we've met before. Anyway, in reviewing you edit at MH where you say "currently featured on the television show" I think needs to be slightly reworded so as to outlast the Deal or No Deal show. See what you can think of to fix the temporal issue. Thanks,  :-) --hydnjo talk 20:46, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Done. --Kainaw ^(talk) 21:02, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Well that was quick. Thanks, hydnjo talk 21:43, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Planter's wart redirect

Please see Wikipedia:Redirect#How_to_make_a_redirect for how to make a redirect properly. Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. -- King of Hearts ^talk 03:23, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

I always forget to link my redirects. Before I could click Edit to fix it, you already did. Man, you are fast! --Kainaw ^(talk) 00:52, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Reference Desk - Gorilla DNA

Just to say that, yes, I'm in a dangerously constructive mood.

This can't be good.

I need to go out and bash something to regain my balance, and make sure it doesn't happen again... ;) — QuantumEleven | (talk) 23:38, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

No problem. Your answer was great. The question was terrible. I've often considered replying with something along the lines of, "You are absolutely correct. It is easier explain when you realize that science is based on numbers and numbers do not exist. So, science does not exist. Therefore, all of science is wrong and anything created by science, such as automibiles, medicines, and human DNA, does not exist either. All in all, it is rather obvious that humans absolutely did not come from monkeys. They came from hedgehogs." --Kainaw ^(talk) 23:55, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

That's a pretty good one - tee hee hee! :) — QuantumEleven | (talk) 09:53, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Why are you such a troll?

"no different than Americans failing to comprehend a kilometer and gawking at fields covered with green instead of cement"

I'm not sure where you're from, but you might consider visiting any one of the western United States.

That comment alone doesn't make you a troll, but your generally unhelpful and negative tone at the Reference Desk does. I've heard you kick out some good answers, try sticking to that.

My comment is factual and it was in context. The context was an attempt to poke fun at dumb Africans who can't comprehend distance. Well, it is a fact that most Americans cannot comprehend a kilometer and most Americans do stand and gawk at the unpaved countryside. If you don't like facts, stay away from the Reference Desk. As for being a troll - learn what a troll is. A person who doesn't sit idly and let people make stereotypical comments about Africans, Chinese, Mexicans... does not make one a troll. --Kainaw ^(talk) 18:53, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Please dont bite the newcomers

Regarding: Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Humanities#City.2FVillage_inquiry
Please don't bite the newcomers — ßottesiηi ^{Tell me what's up} 21:21, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

So, it is now against Wikipedia policy to tell new users that they can use the search box!? I didn't say "Hey idiot! Use the search box!" I said "If you want to get wild and crazy, you could use the search box." --Kainaw ^(talk) 12:21, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

No, but there are certainly nicer ways to have said it. You don't need to make them feel any stupider once they realize the obvious solution to their dilemma. — ßottesiηi ^{Tell me what's up} 23:54, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Fusion Fission

Can I just say, regarding your posts on the subject, I think you have come to some grave misunderstanding about these forms of nuclear reactions.

• You can release energy from atoms larger than iron by splitting them, however the products of this reaction cannot be smaller than iron.
• You can release energy from atoms smaller than iron by fusing them, however the products of this reaction cannot be larger than iron.

So effectively iron is a barrier, over which atoms cannot cross through a reaction that produces energy. The products of a Uranium reaction can be fused, but it would recquire more energy than was produced by splitting the Uranium in the first place.

It is important to understand some basic laws of physics, one of which, the law of conservation of energy, states they energy cannot be created or destroyed or used up, and can only change states.

This means that the exact opposite of a process that realeses energy, recquires energy.

There are no loopholes in the universe. It is not possible to find a complete loop process that finishes where it starts and only releases energy.

Philc _T+C 21:04, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

also you said type actinide fusion into google, and nothing came up regarding what you seemed to be talking about. [2] Philc _T+C 21:05, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

That is because you didn't care to pay any attention to what I said. Other users, who had never heard of "actinide fusion", claimed that it was the process of fusing nuclear waste to make uranium. I never made that claim. However, nobody appears to care what I wrote. They are too busy trying to explain to me that you can't fuse nuclear waste to make uranium. Just take off the stupidity blinders and read my comments without the ones in between. You will see that I only stated that actinide fusion is a process that, if it works, will allow nuclear power (not uranium power) to be a renewable resource. --Kainaw ^(talk) 23:04, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Ok, fair enouigh, no hard feelings. But I fail to see how the process would work, as notihng is being used up. Philc _T+C 17:47, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

This is frustrating on two points: First, it is amazing how one person's reply to a comment can cause so many to ignore the original comment. Second, I do not know the details about actinide fusion. I've read about it in Dept of Energy reports. They call it an "infinite source of power". So, all I wanted to do was point out that there are "some people" who consider nuclear power to be renewable (which it must be if it is infinite). But, my point was derailed by a misinterpretation of what I said. Also - I had a splitting headache. You know those kind that get behind your eye and start pushing on it real hard until you can barely read because the letters get all fuzzy. --Kainaw ^(talk) 18:09, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Yeh its cool man, even if you were misinterprated, if you were right, which after having spoken to you, and some other people and discussed it, seems to be the case, then fundementally, even if they dont believe you, its their loss. But initially the report being economical with the truth, and you possibly not understanding, led to you coming out with something a bit different. What it actually says is that fission waste can be used in a fusion reactor where instead of extracting the energy from the fusion to create electricity, you can use it to fuse neutrons into the waste, which then decays further through fission. The waste left by this is has no residual radioactivity, which is the benefit over the current system. This is called burning, in a sort of slangy way, as it releases energy. That is what it means to my understanding, I may well be wrong.

The comment that this would lead to infinite energy, is in fact to put it simply, a lie. What it is reffering to though is the fact that the uranium resources on this planet are so collosaly huge that it is even on a long time scale (in relation to human civilisation) in no danger of running out.

This may well be what you meant, or even said, but in the context of the conversation, it didnt come across well. Admittadly this is something that was out of your control but now, its in the past and it doesn't really matter. Hope your headaches better. ;-) . Philc _T+C 22:52, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Soviet invasion of Afghanistan

It is absurd! Maximum, the state permitted public religion praticse! Vess talk

And? Your exclamation makes little sense to me. --Kainaw ^(talk) 00:41, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Reference desk

Dear Kainaw — I'm really sorry for my tone in my last posting in the heat absorption question. One too many glasses of wine last night — I was hoping to get a chance to edit it this morning before you saw it. Mainly I assumed that you were mixing up IR and heat because you had said that reflecting IR would avoid much of the heating effect of the sun — which is partially true but potentially misleading — but I guess I assumed too much. I really don't know how we got on to the evolutionary discussion, but like Knowledge Seeker said, you can't change all humans by a change in recorded history. Anyway, I've edited down my response, and given you a more cordial reply, and I greatly apologize for being rude. — Asbestos | Talk (RFC) 11:34, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks a lot. Lately, I've had a thing happen quite often. I say something like, "Hedgehogs can be domesticated." Then, someone responds with, "That is stupid! It is illegal to have domesticated hedgehogs in California!" Then, I reply that the legality of hedgehogs in California has nothing to do with the domestication ability of hedgehogs. Then someone intelligent comes in halfway through the conversation and tells me that I shouldn't be telling people in California to keep domesticated hedgehogs. This is similar in that I had two points:

"Blocking infrared light will reduce perception of heat." I live near the beach in Charleston, SC. Tourists come here all the time and go out when it is overcast. The infrared is blocked and it feels cool. They get burnt to a crisp by the ultraviolet. They go out when it isn't overcast and they feel the heat (note, the 'feel' heat - the thermometer reads the same temp both times). Since they feel heat, they come in quicker and don't get burnt as bad. So, that is the basis of my comment that feeling infrared makes a human feel heat.

"I've read research papers that claim the ability to see blue is one of the more recent evolutionary 'jumps'." Please keep the disclaimer in mind. I've only ready about this - I am not an evolutionary scientist. This comment led to all kinds of problems. One person assumed that by "jump", I meant that everyone woke up one day and could see blue. Another person thought that since I related a story from about 5,000 years ago, I was claiming that the evolutionary jump began 5,000 years ago. Your responses were obviously from the responses to what I said, not exactly what I said.

As you can see in the comments on this page, this is happening a lot to me lately. Right now, I'm being accused of claiming that the whites who were born and raised in South Africa are not African. What I said was that a few hundred years ago, the Eurpoean governments sent governors to South African colonies who were not born or raised in Africa. So, now I'm being racist towards white Africans? I would greatly appreciate advice for avoiding this problem in the future! --Kainaw ^(talk) 15:00, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Well, that advice I can't give you. The only advice I have is from my own experience above, which is not to get cited on an EUI charge (editing under the influence)... All the best, — Asbestos | Talk (RFC) 15:48, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Ernst Junger: Help Desk

I want to thank you for your suggestion on my topic. I did incorporate some Eastern philosophy at one point in my paper, yet within the context that Nabokov used red (at least for the quotes I saw), it seemed the rebellion statement seemed best fit. Thanks though very much,

Bob N

Ps...This is why I tolerate Wikipedia...too many times its a back and forth arguement for people...but helping with input is a great thing/resource. Thanks again!

You're welcome. I have studied a lot of ancient Chinese history - I'm not so good at modern times (too boring for me). But, it is well-known in China that white is for mourning and red is for celebration. I know nothing about the usage of colors outside of China. --Kainaw ^(talk) 12:23, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Original Barnstar
		I award this barnstar to User:Kainaw for his numerous contributions to the Wikipedia Reference Desk. Brian G. Crawford 05:59, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! I thought I was going to go through my Wikipedia service just like the Marines... made L. Corporal out of Boot Camp and never got a promotion or award for the next four and a half years. But, I was the senior lance corporal (time in grade) in the Marines at one point. --Kainaw ^(talk) 12:25, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Actually, your contributions have been quite useful. That's why I gave you the barnstar, regardless of your training. Good luck with your endeavors! Brian G. Crawford 06:49, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Atlantic musings...

Check out [3] :-) --HappyCamper 19:15, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. This means that it can be done and perhaps my memory of some lady swimming the Atlantic is not completely false. --Kainaw ^(talk) 21:08, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

John Hunt Morgan and boat burning

Hello! I posted a brief reply to your message on Wikipedia:Reference desk archive/Humanities/May 2006#Civil War regarding John Hunt Morgan's burning of a passenger ship during Morgan's Raid. Hope this helps! Scott Mingus 13:20, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. --Kainaw ^(talk) 13:44, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for your assistance at the help desk. Hedgehogs are cool, and might I add that Suicidal Tendencies kicks ass. One quick Suicidal question: I have "Still Cyco After All These Years". Is that their first album with 2 bonus tracks, or did they go back into the studio to re-record their first album and added 2 new tracks?

Anyway, you rule! NIRVANA2764 13:47, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

My understanding is that they went back and rerecorded all the stuff off the original Suidical Tendencies tape. The primary reason is that the first tape was just that - a tape. The tape was sampled and put on CD (I don't think I ever had the CD, just the tape). It sounded bad. So, to make it sound good, they had to either dig up masters that were about 20 years old or rerecord the whole thing. Regardless, I'm sure "I Saw Your Mommy" is still good either way. --Kainaw ^(talk) 14:32, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Question

Since you helped with the SR 93-549, can you do me another favor and AfD Senate Document No. 43? Googling all .gov sites for the title or key phrases turns up nothing. I'd {{prod}} it, but I'd hate to have such an out and out hoax linger for a week. 68.39.174.238 00:27, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Done. --Kainaw ^(talk) 01:12, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanx dude. Also, considering the contributions history of User:NarrowPathPilgrim, do you think he should be tagged with {{hoaxer}}? 68.39.174.238 03:02, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

I don't think he is a hoaxer. I think he is like many Americans who want the world to be very simple for their very simple minds. So, they believe that George W. Bush is the sole cause of everything bad and eagerly believe anything they read as long as it is anti-Bush. It reminds me of an old saying: Never attribute to conspiracy that which can easily be attributed to stupidity. --Kainaw ^(talk) 12:49, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Ragardless of the root cause, if the end result is that s/he continually adds false information, I suspect it would help if people could clearly see that if they run across more "contributions" like SD 43. 68.39.174.238 20:53, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

That is why I argued to have those "conspiracy theory" documents put into an article and redirect all the titles to the article where it explains that even if the documents do exist, there is no conspiracy. Perhaps I will just do it (since I can edit Wikipedia too). I just don't have a lot of time. Lots of preparations with a baby on the way. --Kainaw ^(talk) 17:02, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

RD/S Newton's Laws of Motion

I replied to your comment under Rate of fall and heat on the ref desk with respect to Newton's second law, if you care to respond—just a heads-up. —Bradley 22:59, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

I saw. After being ignored three times in a row, I have no interest in repeating myself a fourth time. --Kainaw ^(talk) 13:28, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

You may have the desire to update the Newton's second law - historical development section of Newton's laws of motion as it discusses mass, which according to your statements is entirely inappropriate. —Bradley 16:52, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

And again, you ignore my point. See Internet troll so you can learn how to not argue like one. --Kainaw ^(talk) 17:15, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

From my perspective, you are not addressing my point instead you suggest that I apply for a Nobel prize. I guess we have different understandings of trollish behavior. The question that started with this referred to the effects of gravity, which has the notable characteristic that it provides the same acceleration to a feather as to a lead weight. Newton's laws of motion describe classical mechanics which is not Newton's law of universal gravitation. The entirety of my point is that these are different things and the laws of motion in no way suggest that gravity should work the way it does or any other way. You may have well have claimed that Newton's method doesn't mention the mass of an object and so gravity is independent of mass. —Bradley 15:59, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Let me restate my point: On Earth, the direction of gravity is the same regardless of mass. It always pulls down. That was my point. That has always been my point. Now, had someone stated that my point didn't answer the question, I would have agreed and appologized. However, every claim was that I was wrong. The direction of gravity depends on mass. I disagree with that and so does Newton's Second Law which I referred to over and over and over... --Kainaw ^(talk) 16:39, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

I re-read the exchange. I don't know how you can reasonably argue that you were referring to the direction of gravity's force. In any case, I'm content that the source of our miscommunication has been found. —Bradley 18:45, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

sorry

I should have read your RD answer more fully before suggesting the falsehoods were yours. The topic doesnt bring out the best in people does it? alteripse 15:00, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Hey - you should read what was said when I quoted Newton's second law and commented that nowhere in his second law does it mention the word mass. However, I tried to understand the Israel/Palestine thing. Everyone has a different view of the "facts" in the past, so I don't see a possible solution. --Kainaw ^(talk) 18:03, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Simple web-page that creates a URL

(From the reference desk)

Hi,

I'd like to create a simple page which has a textbox input, and which then sends the user to a URL based on the text, without using PHP (which my host doesn't allow).

E.g., if the user entered "test", and clicked "GO", they could be taken to www.blahblah.com/blah/test.html.

I'm not a programmer, but I do understand the basics of javascript and the like.

Any help would be greatly appreciated! 199 (talk) 20:52, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Assuming that if you don't have PHP, you don't have ANY server-side scripting, you must use JavaScript. This can be done. Make the form as normal, but add onsubmit='javascript:page_forward();return false;' to it. Now, instead of submitting the form, it will call the javascript function "page_forward". Next, you need an ID on your text field. Add id='user_text' to the text field. Finally, in javascript, you can use document.src='http://mypage.com/somdir/'+document.getElementById('user_text').value; to set the source of the current document to the new URL. If you don't know enough HTML or JavaScript to do that, just ask. --Kainaw ^(talk) 21:13, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi Kainaw,

Thanks for your help so far. I thought I understood what I had to do, but I haven't quite worked it out yet.

Currently, in my html file, I have the code below. When I type something into the textbox and hit "enter", nothing happens except that the box goes blank again, and a question mark appears at the end of my url at the top of my screen.

Sorry for the cluelessness, but any pointers you could give would be much appreciated.

Thanks! 199 (talk) 13:58, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

<div id="text">
 Type in the address

 <form>
  Address: 
  <input type="text" id='user_text' onsubmit='javascript:page_forward();return false;'>
 </form>

 <SCRIPT language="JavaScript">
  function page_forward()
  {
   document.src='http://www.example.com/'+document.getElementById('user_text').value;
  }
 </SCRIPT>

</div>

I'm sorry. I made a mistake. You want to use "document.location" instead of "document.src". Also, move the "onsubmit" setting to the form element instead of the input one. --Kainaw ^(talk) 15:02, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

That worked! Thanks! 199 (talk) 15:32, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

humanities desk

Hey, just FYI. Greatgavini seemed to accidentally delete your stone age response on the humanities desk. Don't want to rever because others have added other comments to the desk and don't want to readd your answer just because it might look weird. So you might want to fix that :) Digfarenough 16:56, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. It happens often. Some people think I'm too rude, so my responses should just be deleted. --Kainaw ^(talk) 16:58, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Of course it wasn't on purpose. I think it was an edit conflict or something - my answer got deleted twice on the same desk. Regards. - THE GREAT GAVINI {T-C} 17:59, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

That is what I assumed. My answers are deleted so often by so many people, I just never know anymore. --Kainaw ^(talk) 18:01, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Answer is now replaced. Hope that's everything sorted out. - THE GREAT GAVINI {T-C} 18:07, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. --Kainaw ^(talk) 18:25, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Kudos for stickin' to your guns. You make valid points. I like your user-page addition. Thanks for neither retracting your comments nor leaving wikipedia. Nimur 18:11, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. I've always felt that no matter what a person's opinion is on any matter, half the world disagrees with him. On the flip-side, it means that someone will agree with me (or at least feel I've made a valid point) once in a while. --Kainaw ^(talk) 18:54, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Syntax and spelling

Your observation on the computing reference desk was fascinating anecdotal evidence of a connection between spelling errors and programming errors. It would be interesting to collect real statistics as well. I do wonder about root causes. Is it lower intelligence? Laziness? Sloppiness? Being grammar challenged? Or otherwise linguistically challenged? Or perhaps an untrained eye?

Training can make a real difference, as I've learned from personal experience. Today I can look and almost reflexively spot details that were once invisible. Knowing that has been valuable, because it helps me be more patient when someone else seems blind or stupid. "How can they not see what's right in front of them?!!" And yet, somehow, the untrained eye doesn't see.

Take a non-threatening example: a walk in nature. A tiny movement or a shape will catch my eye and I'll see an animal that a companion does not. Yet I'm sure a seasoned hunter or botanist will notice myriad details that have meaning to them but not to me. Perhaps a deer polished its antlers on a tree. Perhaps a difference in the kind of plants growing in one area suggests an underground spring.

Likewise, I think a trained programmer is likely to be much more sensitive to "off by one" errors, and to appreciate the benefit of well-chosen names, good structure, and consistent formatting.

I find the frequent mistakes in spelling, grammar, and word usage on the internet excruciating; they leap out at me unbidden. The experience of those who make the mistakes must be dramatically different; being blind to their own errors, they can hardly imagine the impact on others. (What must a basset hound think of human inability to smell what's right under our noses?) --KSmrq^T 06:20, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Clique lingo has also been present. When I was in the Marines, it was common to say, "I'm going to hit the head." I'd never say such a thing in the hospital/university I now work at. However, I miss the TLA's of the military. Everything is coded now. A patient with an ICD9-402 needs a CPT 90935 but may allow an HCPCS A4670. Natually, I have a slew of code books on my desk.

Code creates an identity and aids in communication. Common phrases are shortened so they can be communicated quickly. That is the primary source of the extremely abbreviated language used today: typing messages into phones using the least number of letters necessary. It isn't l33t - which usually requires more characters to type a single word. However, the problem I see is that some people do not realize that there is a time and place for text-message typing and a time and a place for grammatically correct typing. Then, when a student gets a C instead of an A on an assignment because the comments were unreadable, they complain. So, each assignment that I grade now states clearly that all comments must be in complete, unabbreviated, grammatically correct English - and each typo will be at least one point off. Over half the students cannot spell "integer". I do not know why "interger" is so common.

In my opinion, it comes down to respect. Children are raised in one of two environments. Either they are abused, neglected, and raised by whomever happens to be around at the time - which creates a lack of respect for everyone else. Or, they are raised in the "you are special" environment so that they have no reason to have any respect for anyone else. Either way, they do not respect others and expect everyone else to help them. That is the reason there are so many people in the reference desk who refuse to read their textbooks, pay attention in class, or do a quick Google search. Instead, they just ask homework questions and get upset if nobody gives them the answer. --Kainaw ^(talk) 13:06, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Computers and nature are great teachers. They don't care about your attitude or background. If you write a program correctly, it works; if you don't, it doesn't. No use complaining or making excuses. Climbing a rock wall or making a fire is much the same. Nature does not care about your rationalizations. I expect Paris Island was equally blunt, along the lines of "If you think this is tough, you can't imagine real combat." Fortunately, humans are fairly adaptable. If they can adapt to abuse or pampering, they can also adapt to a society that tolerates neither. But I don't envy you teaching them. (It could contribute to hypertension; better monitor that blood pressure and hope you don't need hemodialysis.) --KSmrq^T 15:48, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Science desk

You mentioned a little while back about excercises you used to do to increase your lung capacity. Did you usually hold your breath in/out or was simply exhaling/inhaling enough? I've been looking into ways to increase my lung capacity for swimming, as well as the fact that I sometimes suffer from the "can't breathe in fully feeling" syndrome and I wonder if excercising my lungs might help!  freshofftheufoΓΛĿЌ  12:46, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

I never held my breath for long times, but I did blow out for extremely long times. My school used to have competitions to see who could play a note on a trumpet, sax, flute... the longest. They stopped when I tried to win a bet and blacked out. I don't remember how long the time was or if I won. Far too long ago. --Kainaw ^(talk) 14:10, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Alright. Now that I think about it, if the lung's muscular respiration is at all like any other muscle, sustaining a "flex" shouldn't have much effect at all.  freshofftheufoΓΛĿЌ  13:12, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Huge thanks for sorting out my Userpage

(See title lol). Thanks so much! Batmanand | Talk 06:57, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

No problem. --Kainaw ^(talk) 12:15, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Interested in joining [{Wikipedia:Wikiproject American football]]?

I noticed that you are involved in the NFL wikiproject. I started a new project at: Wikipedia:WikiProject American football to help clean up the non-NFL football articles (mostly football strategy type articles). Please consider joining this project and helping out where possible. --Jayron32 02:11, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

why is this doing this?

that's not what i mean. when i'm logged in it does that, rarely, but it does. --66.218.18.134 20:13, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

It is your web browser. Try a different one. I use Firefox on Fedora. --Kainaw ^(talk) 20:14, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

US Congress

Hey Kainaw,

I don't disagree with you at all about the US Congress. I agree that it is sad that so many Americans don't know how their system works. The same goes for other countries. I'm Canadian and it's the same up here, about our government, as well as our understanding of the American government. I was once getting a haircut and these two moron barbers were having a discusion about Bush and Saddam. One pointed out that Saddam was a dictator, then the other pointed out "y'know...some would argue that Bush is a dictator too..." How much more moronic a statement can their be? Like Bush or hate him (this isn't about THE President, but about the OFFICE of The President), While Saddam openly executed whomever he pleased, Nixon couldn't even authorize a simple B&E without ultimately being forced to resign over it. Clinton couldn't even get a little intern action in the Oval Office without being impeached. I totally agree with you. The President's powers are quite limited when compared to Congress. All I was questioning was your manner of pointing that out. It's quite cryptic. Even I didn't know what you were talking about until you explained it. Perhaps, as a suggestion, if you want to make that point again, maybe you should try to be a bit less cryptic and a bit more direct about it. Not everyone can appreciate or make much sense out of such subtle remarks.

Another thing I'd like to mention is that I realize now that I over-reacted a while back with that whole "death-threat" thing. At the time I figured you for some kind of trollish wacko, but reading your posts, and especially seeing as how you don't seem to bear any grudges against me for it, but continue to debate in a civil and intelligent manner, I realize that I was wrong, and I apologize.

Lewis

Loomis 12:03, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. My intention isn't to be cryptic. My intention is to make it a sort of inside joke for the handful of people who know that there is such a thing as Congress. --Kainaw ^(talk) 15:51, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

It's completely up to you if you want to keep it an inside joke. In fact I feel quite privileged to be an "insider". :) I'm just wondering though, why wouldn't you want others, both your fellow Americans as well as foreigners to better understand how the US government works? At first I actually took your remarks in quite the opposite manner. I had originally assumed that your statements were meant to mean that Congress is a useless, powerless branch of the US government. That's why they had me so puzzled. Think about it, what do you think you'd make of the phrase: "...now if the US actually had something called a Congress that can do such things..." the first time you heard it? I like to think of wiki as a place where I can learn a lot about things I don't know, and (hopefully) do my best to contribute. In any case, it's your call, and it goes without saying that I'll respect whatever you choose. All the best. Loomis 22:31, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Upright_scanner.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Upright_scanner.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 09:52, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Cool! Now I don't have to delete it myself. --Kainaw ^(talk) 18:07, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

?

I am not sure to what you mean. X [Mac Davis] (DESK|How's my driving?) 17:26, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Ah, I'm sorry. I'll leave better edit summaries. Wait, I'll leave great edit summaries. I do click the little section edit, but if I leave the edit summary as /* Something here */ then it'll reload the page and tell me to put an edit summary, damn it! I can, just click save page again, but that means having to do it twice. I'll leave a "d" at the end so that I can fool it. Thanks! X [Mac Davis] (DESK|How's my driving?) 17:34, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Happy Thanksgiving!