Jump to content

Wikipedia:Reference desk/Miscellaneous

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 140.247.241.150 (talk) at 17:54, 27 January 2009 (Are the Discovery Channel guys nuts?). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Welcome to the miscellaneous section
of the Wikipedia reference desk.
Select a section:
Want a faster answer?

Main page: Help searching Wikipedia

   

How can I get my question answered?

  • Select the section of the desk that best fits the general topic of your question (see the navigation column to the right).
  • Post your question to only one section, providing a short header that gives the topic of your question.
  • Type '~~~~' (that is, four tilde characters) at the end – this signs and dates your contribution so we know who wrote what and when.
  • Don't post personal contact information – it will be removed. Any answers will be provided here.
  • Please be as specific as possible, and include all relevant context – the usefulness of answers may depend on the context.
  • Note:
    • We don't answer (and may remove) questions that require medical diagnosis or legal advice.
    • We don't answer requests for opinions, predictions or debate.
    • We don't do your homework for you, though we'll help you past the stuck point.
    • We don't conduct original research or provide a free source of ideas, but we'll help you find information you need.



How do I answer a question?

Main page: Wikipedia:Reference desk/Guidelines

  • The best answers address the question directly, and back up facts with wikilinks and links to sources. Do not edit others' comments and do not give any medical or legal advice.
See also:


January 21

What country has the biggest official residence for its head of government?

What country's head of government has the biggest official residence, in terms of interior square footage (or some other relevant measures)? --173.49.15.243 (talk) 04:15, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

India. According to the 'Trivia' section of article Rashtrapati Bhavan, it is the biggest residence of any President in the world. manya (talk) 04:24, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, but he's not the head of government. The head of government of India is the Prime Minister. If we are counting head of state, then things like Buckingham Palace get into the works. Tb (talk) 06:31, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The Sultan of Brunei does pretty well for himself. Does he count? --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 07:36, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah - I'd be really surprised if the Sultan isn't #1 in this regard. I once did some work for him (indirectly, through the company I worked for at the time) - and came close to being flown out to Brunai on his personal Jumbo jet (which he likes to pilot himself) to install some equipment at his palace. Sadly, (I guess) he decided to simply ignore his contract with our company and abruptly lost interest in our product for no well-explained reason. As our contract lawyers pointed out - suing the ruler of a foreign dictatorship rarely turns out well in the end - so we let him get away with it and were stuck with something like a million dollars of losses as a result. The amount of money he can splash around (and the attention that gets) is nothing short of astounding. We engineers like to abbreviate everything - but we took particular relish in shortening "The Sultan of Brunai" to "The SOB" in all subsequent internal communications relating to the project. SteveBaker (talk) 15:09, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If you decided you wouldn't do well suing for breach of contract, you probably also wouldn't do too well defending yourself against a libel charge... --Tango (talk) 23:40, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Actually - I don't think we would have had any problems if he'd sued us. The problem with us suing him was that he's a head of state and had diplomatic immunity in the UK. Suing him in Brunai...not so attractive a prospect. SteveBaker (talk)
I recommend as therapy "The Sultan of Brunai" on the album The Kaviar Sessions by Kevin Gilbert. Not all that complementary ... "I am the Sultan of Brunai / I'm just an ordinary guy / the regular rules do not apply" --Tagishsimon (talk) 14:21, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
He ordered (IIRC) seven of these - one for each of his sons - to be given to the eldest son on his birthday. They had to be made in the custom signature color of each prince (we normally made them only in red) with their personal logo's on them - there were lots of custom hardware and software changes - we took out the coinbox mechanism and made them so you had to press a particular ring or pendant against a sensor to turn them on...there were custom voice prompts...you name it. The team of 20 people who were to fly to Brunai to install them had to have a bunch of shots before we could fly to the palace...we were individually briefed by his team on protocol for talking with him and the princes and how we should behave within the palace. Our top game tester was to stay on for months to train the kids in how to play the game well. It was all a tremendous hoopla - then, suddenly, one day...nothing. The Sultan's team stopped talking to us - we couldn't contact them - they stopped replying to letters - they didn't pay their next stage payments - nothing. SteveBaker (talk) 17:37, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How do Radio Station Censor Songs?

When listening to rap songs with explicit lyrics on North American radio stations, one will always hear the explicit words censored out. There are several ways of doing this: some radio stations "beep" out the word, some blank it out and other replace the explicit word with a non-explicit word. My question is, how do they replace the explicit word with a non-explicit one? Does the artist lend their voice for that single word? Or does the radio station somehow digitally emulate the artist's voice? Acceptable (talk) 04:31, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sometimes the artist records two different versions (My Name Is by Eminem, for example). When the words are bleeped or blanked out, it isn't done by individual radio stations, but by whoever they got the song from (the record label, I suppose). Adam Bishop (talk) 05:46, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That is generally the case, but it's straightforward to blank or bleep out a word in a song using sound editing software, and some radio stations will do it themselves if there is something they wish to play which does not have a radio-friendly version available (for instance, something by a local act). Warofdreams talk 11:02, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If you have iTunes (this is the program I am familiar with, others may offer the same feature), you can search for Clean versions of songs. Like Adam Bishop mentioned, many record labels record clean versions of songs for air play, sometimes even altering the content of the song (Purple Pills by D12 for example). Livewireo (talk) 14:39, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In this context, does Clean mean unsoiled by the hands of censors, i.e. pure/unedited/original? Or does it mean the opposite, cleaned up/edited/censored? It's obviously a matter of opinion, but which is the established use?/85.194.44.18 (talk) 23:10, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Clean means the censored/edited version. --Crackthewhip775 (talk) 00:26, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Check the Radio edit article. Exxolon (talk) 01:35, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Are there any money-free psychic chat rooms online?

Well, I was wandering around the Internet searching for a chat room where I can talk to psychic people who would help me on problems and issues on friendship, because I got an online friend on Yahoo! Messenger who I try to talk to him, but he doesn't respond, so I was thinking that something must be up with him. I'm searching for a money-free chat room, meaning that I'm searching for a chat room where I don't have to pay or cost money to enter. So, are there any money-free psychic chat rooms online? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.238.167.201 (talk) 06:17, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Psychic abilities do not exist. It would be wiser to locate a self help chatroom or a message board frequented by older people in similar walks of life who will have dealt with the same sorts of difficulties you are dealing with now. They will be able to give you just as good or better advice than any alleged psychic could. Other refdeskers can probably point you towards an online community that fits the bill. 152.16.15.23 (talk) 07:12, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
At Wikipedia, the goal is to be impartial as explained by Wikipedia's Neutral Point of View. At least that was what I was lead to believe somewhere along the line. Might have been something I read... who knows. Anyway... Distressed Wiki-Surfer, the Psychic article demonstrates some information I believe you might find helpful on your personal quest to believe or not believe in parapsychological phenomena. As for your missing friend, I do sincerely hope you hear from him soon. In the mean time, if you know his basic information, 9 times out of 10 the police department in the area he lives (at least in the US) can help you make sure he's ok. My Best Wishes to you. Operator873 (talk) 08:30, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
To Operator873: Wikipedia is indeed required to be impartial - but that in no way forces us to tell lies. Please read WP:FRINGE and (easier reading): Wikipedia:Why Wikipedia cannot claim the earth is not flat which make it abundantly clear that we are NOT supposed to go around saying that psychic powers are real when the abundance of peer-reviewed, respected scientific journals says they are unambiguously NOT real. We are allowed to say things like "Psychics claim such-and-such (insert reference here)but mainstream science says this is all bullshit." - that's what "impartial" means in our terms...it most certainly DOES NOT mean that we give equal weight to the wild-assed opinions of nut-jobs as you are clearly doing. If you cannot abide by those rules - then go take your crazy theories someplace else because they aren't welcome here.
To our OP: There is no such thing as psychic powers - there really, truly isn't - no matter how much you and others wish there were. Hence anyone claiming to have them is either (a) a charlatan (a liar - a con artist) or (b) self-deluded (a lunatic). In neither case should you be going to such a person for help with personal matters. There are plenty of OTHER chatrooms where you can get help from caring people who aren't out to mess you up even more. So-called psychics are the worst possible people to go to because they are either crazy or out to screw you in some way - and in neither case do you want them advising you on matters like this.
SteveBaker (talk) 14:58, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
As the above responses indicate the existence of psychic powers is unproven to date but there are many people who claim to have them. These people almost always require some payment for their services and you are unlikely to find a free 'psychic website'. I would advise you to seek some other way to contact or find your lost friend. Richard Avery (talk) 08:39, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
One famous psychic was Uri Geller, who was able to bend spoons. It turned out that he was really able to do it, however not by means of the power of his mind, but just by his hands, as a candid camera film proved. In 100% of the cases of psychics examined, not only a natural explication has been found, but always a very trivial and stupid one. Another guy -maybe Uri himself- claimed to be able to materialize objects. He hold the object hidden in his hand, and just flung it in air from behind his back. But most people find it easier to believe miracles than their natural and trivial explications, and if you show them the trick they feel themselves deprived of a joyful experience, and may even take offense with you.--PMajer (talk) 22:57, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, I prefer when the magicians reveal their tricks. I think it makes it even more fascinating. A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 13:32, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Back to your question, here is one[1] apparently "free". good luck, Julia Rossi (talk) 03:20, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Phychic abilities aren't proven to exist, and perhaps that means they don't exist. There is, however, some evidence that psi does exist, but that depends on what you call "evidence". But, you know, there are a lot of things that aren't proven to exist... ~AH1(TCU) 17:28, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ICE Conditions of Contract

In England many large construction projects are issued the terms and conditions backed up by the ICE 7th Edition Conditions of Contract, issued by the Institute of Civil Engineers. In these T&C's there is term called "Engineers" Instructions, when can this be used and what are the implications of using it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Glyndotcom (talkcontribs) 09:15, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Development of The Louvre Pyramid

Was the cavernous/underground section all developed at the time of building or were there existing underground tunnels/connections? It looks to be all modern inside (when I visited) but I couldn't find out whether this was all just excavated during the development of this, or not. Any help/input would be great. 194.221.133.226 (talk) 09:38, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you're referring to the Cavern specified in The Da Vinci Code at the bottom of La Pyramide Inversée, I don't think it exists - as per the La Pyramide Inversée article. -- WORMMЯOW  10:49, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nah sorry i'm talking about literally just the main-entrance area (that is set below ground with the giant pyramid above). It's a huge area and it just seems to have lots of tunnels pushing out from it, just wondered if that was stuff that was there before or if they dug it all out when the Pyramid was made. No mystery/conspiracy type stuff. 194.221.133.226 (talk) 11:06, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The nearby Palais Royal Metro station existed long before the Pyramid was built. The Louvre's new underground entrance, topped by the Louvre Pyramid, opened in 1989 and included several new passageways connecting it the the Metro station and nearby streets. A useful tip for visitors is that the underground entrance often has a much shorter queue than the queue outside. Astronaut (talk) 18:42, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

months of the year

From where did we get the names of the months? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.211.63.50 (talk) 12:56, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rome. 209.247.5.207 (talk) 13:25, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Julian_calendar#Month_names, Gregorian_calendar#Months_of_the_year.--droptone (talk) 13:32, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

xbox 360

what games come out 2009? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.22.3.18 (talk) 13:15, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See 2009 in video gaming. Cycle~ (talk) 16:34, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Place Stanislas

Hello, My name is Robert bowling from the United States. I acquired a painting of the Place Stanislas wich was painted 1n 1n 1944 by L Husson. I am in the military and know Nancy was liberated by the 3rd army in 1944. I am just curious about this painting. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.24.208.187 (talk) 15:34, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What do you want to know about it? Algebraist 15:41, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You may be interested in our articles on Nancy and on Place Stanislas. The artist could possibly have been Leon Husson, though that biography only lists his birth and death dates. This auction house is selling a Leon Husson painting which depicts another scene in Nancy from 1944 but does not list a reserve price or estimate of value. This page (in french) has a pretty good biography of him with lots of sample artworks. You could look through that to see if your painting matches any of the ones there, or is similar to it. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 20:26, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Scottish Banknotes.

Now that The Royal Bank of Scotland has been 80% taken over by the UK Treasury; and given that The Bank of Scotland is now wholly owned by Lloyds TSB; and given that The Clydesdale Bank is no longer a Scottish owned institution, what is the point of these 3 "banks" continuing to print and issue their "own" banknotes, especially so as they merely serve to confuse English and other tourists as they are so different from Bank of England banknotes; and also as they are usually unacceptable in England, and also on the continent where even though the Euro is the accepted legal tender, some currency exchange shops will accept English notes, but NOT Scottish ones? 92.21.251.196 (talk) 16:13, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your claim that Scottish notes are "usually unacceptable in England" is not sustained by my weekly commutes between Scotland and England; in five years I've never had a Scottish note declined or even questioned anywhere in England, nor even looked at twice north of Leeds. I don't think English people are nearly as easily confused are you imagine. 87.113.74.22 (talk) 18:37, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
When I worked in a pub in West Sussex (south cost of England), I accepted Scottish banknotes. It only happened once or twice, but it wasn't a problem. I think that's pretty common throughout the country. --Tango (talk) 18:51, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I am interested to learn that the previous 2 respondents have never experienced problems exchanging Scottish Banknotes in England, especially when considering that England does NOT produce a £1 note, using instead the £1 coin. So I suspect we are to accept that England accepts a "foreign" banknote the equivalent of which they do not use themselves? I don't think so - nay - I know from experience, having family in northern England that I visit regularly, that Scottish banknotes are regularly refused - indeed, I have even sometimes been offered 95 pence on the £Scottish in Supermarkets etc. But back to the main thrust of the OP's question - why do the 3 "Scottish" Banks still persist in producing "Scottish" banknotes when the "parent" banks are themselves owned outside of Scotland? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.21.251.196 (talk) 19:28, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Because there is no need to change. Anyway, Clydesdale has been owned by National Australia Group for years - if the ownership of the bank mattered, they'd have been printing Australian Dollars, as would Northern Bank. 87.113.74.22 (talk) 19:52, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
To answer the OPs question, its because the banks are authorized to do so by the government. Regardless of who owns the banks ultimately, the institutions are authorized to print them and thus they do. It is noted in our article on Legal tender that Scottish banknotes are NOT legal tender (even in Scotland), and thus it would seem to be up to the individual merhcants as to whether or not they will accept them; however this reference: [2] notes that in Scotland, the law would indicate that Scottish banknotes must be accepted despite not being legal tender (court cases have upheld this) and that even in England, you are being screwed if you are refused full value on Scottish banknotes. It makes sense, since the Scottish banks will exchange their notes in full value in pounds sterling; thus if someone is taking only 95 pence on the pound for them, they are essentially getting a free 5 pence. You are within your legal right to demand full value; the question is if you are buying a simple can of soda or something whether it is worth dickering over it. The shopkeeper is probably counting on the fact that you won't call him on it. This page from the Bank of England notes that officially Scottish notes are not legal tender (and that English notes are not legal tender in Scotland) but implies that the difference between the two is largely moot, and that Scottish notes should be accepatble for normal transactions. This page notes that Scottish notes are backed pound-for-pound by the issueing bank, meaning that the value should be entirely equivalent. this legal briefing issued under the authority of the UK Parliament indicates that the Scottish banknotes should be considered equivalent to English banknotes for all transactions within the UK. Again, legally ALL UK merchants should accept Scottish banknotes. Some, either out of ignorance or willful deception, may refuse to honor them; the question is whether it is worth it for you to press the issue, or not. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 20:16, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Unless I'm mistaken, in the context of a shop purchase they are free to decline anything if they so wish: legal tender only applies to the settlement of debts. A shop can freely and legally decide to only accept payment in 1p coins if they so wish, they just may find themselves short of customers. Certainly there's no legal requirement to accept Scottish banknotes, I know certain places way down here in Kent do not accept them simply because of the counterfeiting risk: staff are so unfamiliar with them that it's easy to pass off a fake. By all means any bank should happily exchange them for English notes at full face value, but it's really up to the individual seller in most retail contexts. ~ mazca t|c 20:25, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What's the difference between notes you are required by law to accept and legal tender? Also, as Mazca points out "required to accept" only refers to debts, you can always choose not to do business with someone if all they have are Scottish notes. --Tango (talk) 23:35, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I haven't seen a Scottish £1 note for years - surely they are no longer issued? To go back to the original question, what benefit do the banks gain from issuing notes? Is it basically a form of advertising, where no bank would dare to stop unless all the others did too? AndrewWTaylor (talk) 23:15, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
For comparison, banknotes of Northern Ireland are issued by four banks. Two are based in the Republic of Ireland, which has a different currency. A third has been foreign-owned since 1988. jnestorius(talk) 21:16, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Except that merchants are primarily concerned with making money. So if a merchant refuses to accept Scottish banknotes, he does so for one of these reasons:
  1. He believes it will be a hassle to accept them and cash them in for full value (demonstratably false; every bank in the UK will accept them and treat them for full face value)
  2. He wants to scam you, and so will take them at less than full value, so he can pocket the difference
  3. As noted above, he is unfamiliar with them and fears they may be counterfeit; and being unfamiliar with them, he has a harded time verifying they are not (possible)
However, reading through several guides on the internet (some cited above) most people seem to be in agreement that, while some merchants may refuse the notes, most happily accept them without much trouble. Also, most information I have found says that all banks in England will trade them in for Bank of England notes and coinage anyways; so if you are running into trouble, head to a local bank and they will change them for you at full face value Or of course, you could just tell the guy behind the counter that his competition is taking the cash at full value, and you'd be just thrilled to spend it there. He may grudgingly accept it then.--Jayron32.talk.contribs 01:14, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
To offer a tangential example, the difference between the Canadian and U.S. dollar is far greater than that between a Scottish and an English banknote. Merchants on either side of the U.S./Canadian border can choose to accept the other country's currency, mainly as a convenience to tourists. Often there's an in-store "exchange rate" that may or may not have anything to do with the rate you'd get at a bank. The principles at work are those that Jayron32 cites. --- OtherDave (talk) 02:57, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Scottish £1 notes are still issued, or legally capable of being issued. I know Bank of Scotland has ceased printing them but thats just an individual decision by them for commercial reasons. They'll still be accepted & cashed by shops & banks but they have become a lot more scarce since England switched to using £1 coins instead of notes. I think that there is a particular reason for this involving technical money/bank rules issues but I can't remember what. AllanHainey (talk) 14:38, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Late to the party but the Shadow Secretary of State for Scotland David Mundell has launched a private member's bill for Scottish notes to be given equal status - 'Legal' bid over Scots banknotes (BBC). Nanonic (talk) 00:30, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
As a possible answer to the original question: I remember being told years ago that it was in the Scottish banks' interest to issue currency because the currency they issued could be in some way set against the sum they were required by law to have on deposit (with the Bank of England, I think). I'm hazy on the details, and I'm not sure where I might find confirmation or refutation of this suggestion. --ColinFine (talk) 01:35, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Scottish banks can only issue banknotes up to the value of Bank of England notes that they hold - thus ensuring that the BoE controlls the money supply as Scottish banks can't increase the supply of notes beyond the value issued by the BoE. AllanHainey (talk) 14:19, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

2012?

why are people so convinced the world is going to end in 2012?  Buffered Input Output 17:18, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This idea seems to be connected with the Mesoamerican Long Count calendar used by various Mesoamerican civilisations including the Maya. Gandalf61 (talk) 17:25, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Of course, there's the whole problem with the fact that the Maya had very little in the way of what we would recognize as "science", so how they came up with that particular date as the definative "end of the world" seems to have involved what we in the scientific world called "just making shit up". As a means of predicting future events, this method has a rather poor track record compared with methods based on observations of the world and on experimental data. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 19:56, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
FWIW, even the Mayan calandar doesn't say the world ends in 2012. It says there will be a transition into a new era or something like that. A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 20:01, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I doubt the Mayan Calendar even "says" that. It runs on and on, and then just stops at a particular point. The interpretation of what that stop means is an open question. It could be as mundane (not to mention novomundane) as us having a list of the days on which Easter will fall, up to the end of the 21st century. Just because it doesn't mention all the Easters till the year 9,832,712,945,203 doesn't mean there won't be any more Easters after the year 2100. -- JackofOz (talk) 21:19, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps a similar (and hopefully simpler) example is the y10k bug. The end of the long cycle appears to me to be substantially identical to our own calendar in the year 9999: all extant digits are filled and maxed, with the solution simply being "add another digit". "But the Maya don't have a provision for that extra digit," the various groups claim. So? Who among us writes "02009" on our checks? — Lomn 22:01, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Previous times this question has been asked: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 -- BenRG (talk) 22:13, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
As a general rule, people think that the word ends not later than 5 years from the current date. In old times, the end of the word used to be even 50 or 100 years later, but today no-one wants to wait so long, and they think is't their right to be there and see when the sky's doors will be opened and the big trouble starts and everybody is scared. Moreover, it is more fair because if it does not end this time, they can have another chance.--PMajer (talk) 23:18, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ooh-ooh, time for those who can, to invest in software security companies! Julia Rossi (talk) 02:26, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Really all That will happen is that the Mayans will need To hire a bunch of COBOL programmers. --APL (talk) 04:45, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Anyway, if the Mayans were so clever, how come they didn't sail to Spain and take all their gold? /ducks! --Sean 14:49, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's because Sarah Palin decided to run for president in 2012... :-P jk, it's really because people are just as superstitious as they were way back when... Ilikefood (talk) 02:07, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The 'ending' of the Mayan calendar is a bit more fundamental than just "adding another digit" because it doesn't work like that. To take an analogy with our time system...It's kinda like there are only 60 seconds in a minute and only 60 minutes in an hour and only 24 hours...but no days. What if there was no 'unit' bigger than an hour? In their system, there can no more be a "25th hour" than there can be a "61st second". With no way to represent that actual date - some people assume that time must therefore come to an end. The only problem with that is that there is no particular reason to assume the Mayans were right...after all, there is an AWFUL lot of science they didn't know - so whatever it is that lead them to this bizarre calendar, I don't see why we have any reason to believe in it. SteveBaker (talk) 05:13, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I thought they just didn't bother creating something to measure far more time than they'd ever need. I mean, why would they need to measure dates after 2012? They didn't even need as much as they had. 130.88.64.205 (talk) 13:05, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, this question must have been asked 100 times by now. Try ExitMundi (warning: popups). ~AH1(TCU) 17:12, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

President Obama Pledge and the FOIA

Does this mean that people will use this to ask about UFOs and the like? I have just seen this as his people were being sworn in on CNN, Fox News, other news outlets. He just indicated that "there will be transparency in government." 75.88.20.12 (talk) 18:39, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Got logged OUT. Server trouble on my end. Powerzilla (talk) 18:41, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Will people use the FOIA to ask about UFOs? Absolutely. However, that's a rather trivial question. Whether Obama's administration will impact the manner in which UFO-related FOIA requests are answered is harder to say (the best answer is likely "wait and see", though for my money, "no" is a safe bet). I doubt that Obama (or indeed, most of his constituents) have UFO theories at the forefront when they talk about improving transparency. — Lomn 18:46, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Let them ask about UFOs. They're only going to be dissappointed. A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 20:02, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sure it'll only add to conspiracy theory - people who believe that stuff will NEVER be convinced otherwise. If there are no documents describing UFO's - they'll claim that this is PROOF that the documents were destroyed. If there are documents that explain completely and clearly what happened in utterly non-UFO terms - then those will be proof that the government is still covering things up. Every typo, every missing comma and every coffee stain will be the subject of endless new websites containing the usual pseudo-scientific babble. But can't you already ask about UFO's under the existing FOIA? The problem is that you need to know precisely what you're asking FOR. It's not use (for example) asking for all the government documents about...oh...Outer Mongolia. You have to ask SPECIFICALLY for the report written by so-and-so on such-and-such occasion. So just saying "send me all the UFO documents" isn't going to get you anywhere. Also, documents locked away for reasons of national security are never going to be released anyway - and a "real" UFO document would come under that rule. SteveBaker (talk) 01:41, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Executive willingness in the past has influenced the ability to FOIA previously classified material quite a bit—see, for example, the efforts by Hazel O'Leary in the 1990s. But Obama's interest here is no doubt not historical topics—he's making reference to the activities of the Bush administration in the last eight years. Whether that will amend classification rules for the past 50 years or so is not clear. Note that in order for something to get released by FOIA now that wouldn't have been released, say, eight years ago, either the classification guides have to be changed or the departments have to become less stringent in how they claim exceptions (they get exceptions for some rather vague things, which gives a lot of leeway). Whether that would reveal anything interesting about UFOs, I don't know. I personally doubt it. --98.217.14.211 (talk) 01:27, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Incidentally, Obama has already taken actions to strength FOIA and remove the ability of government figures to arbitrarily hold back things. I'm surprised at the speed of this.[3] Again, it's not like Obama personally handles FOIA requests (depending on the agency there is a large bureaucratic mechanism behind them.) Again, I doubt this will reveal anything especially interesting about UFOs, as I doubt any especially interesting about UFOs exists, but that's another question altogether. --98.217.14.211 (talk) 16:34, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The British government recently released a document, which some people suggest indicates the existence of UFOs, and some countries' governments release all of their UFO sighting data, unlike the US, for example Belgium. ~AH1(TCU) 17:09, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

John F. Kennedy's Horse

What was the name of John F. Kennedy's Horse? Th Horse paraded during his funeral. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sdemo66 (talkcontribs) 21:29, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Do you mean Black Jack? ---Sluzzelin talk 21:47, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]


January 22

Temperatures limiting work attendance

I was told that in Germany workers don't have to turn up when it's minus something degrees. Does -30C sound too weird? Am wondering if in Australia there's a limit when the temperature goes the other way – especially around 46C, but having trouble searching for it. Can someone point me in the right direction? thanks, Julia Rossi (talk) 02:12, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Julia. These ([4] and [5]) are two excellent articles on that issue, but not specifically about Australia. --Omidinist (talk) 05:26, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Following EC: Can't confirm any such work regulation in Germany. What there are regulations for are temperatures at the workplace. In winter they ought to be 19 degr C for sitting postitions; 17 degr. C for mostly non-sitting work, 12 degr.C for physical labor; 20 degr. C in offices and 19 degr. on the sales floor. A worker's council can demand that work hours be reduced or workers be let off if temperatures are much different from this. For heat there are court rulings based on which "acceptable working conditions" should not exceed 27 - 29 degr. C for 6 hrs or 29 - 31 degr. C for 4 hrs at temperatures in excess of 31 degr. only essential emergency work may be done. Works councils can demand that companies make an effort to keep workplace temperatures at between 19 and 26 degr. C . There is no regulation for cold temperatures covering schools. It's rather left to the discretion of the headmaster to close their school if temperatures in the classroom can not be maintained at an acceptable level (e.g. broken heating system.) There is a regulation that schools are closed if the outside temperature in summer exceeds 28 degr. C (If this happens during the day, students are let off following the lesson in progress. If high temperatures are expected for the following day, students are often informed not to show up to keep their transport cost down.) The only record of low temperatures as you describe them is from 1956 when the lowest Temperature during a cold spell reached - 31 degr. C (-22.8 degr F). The German climate page lists the lowest temperature ever recorded at -45 degr. C, though. This is exceptional, so there is little likelihood that this would be covered in a workplace regulation. Usually - 15 degr. C is already considered darn cold there.[6] Sorry I didn't convert to F [7]. As for Australia, check if your local OSHA equivalent has s.th. to say about it. [8] No page?!?76.97.245.5 (talk) 05:52, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks so much guys, for your helpful answers with links and perspective. Julia Rossi (talk) 06:52, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm surprised that school gets cancelled at 28ºC in Germany. I've been to school many times on 35º+ days. (Then again, my school blasted the air conditioning so high that we were usually bundled up in hoodies on those scorching summer days.) We were also expected to show up if it was forty below, which also occurs fairly regularly. If school on the Canadian prairies got cancelled every time we had extreme temperatures, we'd never get an education! (To be fair, we did get kept inside at recess when it got below -20º or so.) Likewise, my dad is a mailman for Canada Post, and he says that only twice in his 33 years of experience has the weather ever been considered cold enough to keep the mailmen in. Apparently, we're expected to be a tough bunch up here. Cherry Red Toenails (talk) 22:06, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Coming from Malaysia, I would rarely have attended school if it gets cancalled at 28ºC. We didn't have air conditioning either although we do always have ceiling fans Nil Einne (talk) 10:21, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I remember the rumour that we didn't have to go to school if it was over 40C in the shade (in Aus), but I don't know if there was an actual policy on that one. If the kids aren't there, the teachers won't be either. I don't know of any work policy in Australia. I do know that my office has no air conditioning. Steewi (talk) 23:09, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
To be clear - these regulations aren't talking about outside air temperatures - they are talking about the temperature INDOORS AT THE WORK PLACE. Sure, it gets cold outside in Canada and freakishly hot in Texas - but the OSHA organisation standards are merely requiring companies to heat/cool the workplace to levels that are considered tolerable to workers. SteveBaker (talk) 02:05, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
For workers, yes. But for German schools the outdoor temperature is actually relevant. Before global warming hot days used to be so rare that it was much more efficient to let students off for a day or two than to invest in airconditioning untis. German heating central systems use water radiators [9], so cooling would require an entirely new system. Schools are government financed, so the government has a direct interest in saving money. They have much fewer inhibitions asking businesses to spend to keep workers (=voters) happy. 76.97.245.5 (talk) 17:53, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I've never heard of school/work being cancelled due to extreme temperatures, but school bus cancellations due to snow days (or "ice" days) are fairly common. I'd imagine that they should cancel classes/work if the temperature soared above 40C...one summer I remember the temperature here in S. Ontario rise to 38C, and to 50C with the humidex, and that's not factoring in the sun...I stayed in the basement for the whole day, and luckily it was during summer holidays. Global warming is a different matter... ~AH1(TCU) 17:02, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Without giving legal advice, it seems that in each state workers are required by Workcover (or Worksafe in NT) legislation to be "safe" at work. This is usually taken to mean complying with "codes of practice". In the old days this was dealt with using actual temperatures see worksafe.vic.gov.au or other states for publications about this. Polypipe Wrangler (talk) 04:43, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mummy Wikia

I was not sure of where to turn for the answer, so here is my query:

There is a Wikia page known as Rickipedia that I am a regular contributor (and sadly, almost the only contributor) of. Even though it is a small Wikia branch, I still feel that some other contributors are exactly what that Wikia needs. But I don't know how to get the word out to users on other Wikias (even this one) properly. So to sum up, how can I get the word out about this page properly?

Another question: how would I go about getting the logo prepared for that Wikia to show up at all times? What I mean is this: if anyone has ever seen Wookieepedia, the logo for Wookieepedia, as well as a border on top of the page appear (as shown here [10]. How might I go about doing that?

Third, there seems to be no administrator for that Wikia and although it might be an excessively bold move, I wish to nominate myself as administrator; I feel there's a lot of good that I can do for that page. I know that I'm supposed to be elected by everybody else there, but virtually no-one has shown up on that page since August 2008! What am I to do?

Finally, I thank the answerer for their time and wish them well.

--KnowledgeLord (talk) 06:42, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is Wikipedia, your questions would be better asked over on Wikia. Wikia is a completely separate site (except for some people being involved with both). --Tango (talk) 15:04, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In terms of getting the word out, I'd suggest looking for places in which other fans of the Mummy can be found - perhaps a relevant online forum - and let people there know about the project. If you manage to create a lively and thriving resource, it will be easier to attract further contributors and possibly get coverage in fan magazines, etc.
In terms of general questions around Wikia, including those around logos, have a look at Improving your Wikia. This has lots of useful information, including a section on developing your community.
Thirdly, the administrator (and bureaucrat) for the Wikia is Kongisking, who edited less than a month ago, so I would suggest first contacting them and asking to become an administrator.
Finally, I agree with Tango: Wikia has a large community who are better placed to help with queries such as these than users here. Warofdreams talk 15:06, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Puffed rice

Does anyone know a way or have a link to how to make Puffed rice in a modern US kitchen. (Oven or microwave directions preferred.) (And no, I don't want to go buy it in a store, I'd like to make it at home). Can I use ordinary long grain rice or do I need a specific variety?76.97.245.5 (talk) 07:44, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The link from the article explains the process a little. Heat up rice in water, heat up sand in a pot, pour rice 'at the right temperature' into the sand, swirl it for 30 seconds - by the sounds of it there's a skill to ensuring it doesn't burn (but that's true of popcorn too!!). http://www.worldbank.org/html/cgiar/newsletter/june97/9muri.html

Alternatively try here: http://www.nandyala.org/mahanandi/archives/category/5/rice/murmurapuffed-rice/ all found via a search on google for "making muri". 194.221.133.226 (talk) 10:21, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This one shows what to do with it once you have it (by buying from a store). Graeme Bartlett (talk) 02:01, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry but my US kitchen neither includes an open fireplace nor a claypot and "cooking sand" is also not locally available. (Although we do have cooking rocks. I doubt they would work, though.) I found s.th. for a deep fryer, but would prefer an oven or microwave version. 76.97.245.5 (talk) 07:59, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A Car or Oil Commercial

I saw a commercial for a car, or for a brand of oil, I'm leaning towards oil, that I would really like to see again, or know what it was for. I saw it in a movie theater (that probably doesn't help) and it consisted of a cgi noir world with these demon things chasing sheep around buildings and roads. I remember it being black and white, but with a slight amount of color and reds. The demon things chased the sheep around the city, I believe it was only buildings and roads. I remember being disappointed that it was only for a car/oil, because I was hoping that it was a movie.

I know this amount of info really doesn't help in finding anything out, but it's worth asking for. Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.130.237.183 (talk) 07:53, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're thinking of this Scion commercial. -- Captain Disdain (talk) 08:06, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Wow! What a great advert - and for such a crappy car! Anyway - VERY often, those very distinctive CGI adverts are done by people who previously did something very similar as a non-advert and got 'spotted' by the advertising agency as having a fresh & interesting 'look'. So I'd bet that if you could find the person who did it - that you could find a significantly better video in that exact style somewhere else on the web. SteveBaker (talk) 01:58, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That is exactly it, thanks a lot, and I think I may have found the artist too. Thanks again! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.130.237.183 (talk) 07:51, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Starting a Photography Business

I have enjoyed photography as a hobby for several years. I have a good deal of artistic and technical skill as well as experience and education in business. What I don't have is experience in professional photography or an educational background in photography. My question(s) are: Are there any good resources on the internet where someone just strating out can get assistance and advice for starting a photography business? Where can I look to see an analysis of the industry (SWOT analysis, demographic/geographic statistics). How much should I plan to invest in starting up a photography business assuming that I have a limited amount of professional gear? Thanks! Bikingshaun (talk) 14:48, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What is the purpose of the business? Are you going to photograph 'events' such as weddings, or are you going to produce photographs that can be used in magazines/company literature/on the web? Who are you expected clients? Stock-photography websites such as getty-images and many others (iStockphoto) allow you to upload your photos and then when they are used you are paid for their use. They have criteria of what you can and cannot upload but it's worth looking at their sites first. I would personally recommend that you get a good SLR, but then the lens you get is dependent on your area of expertise. You might want a macro lens, you mgiht want a portrait lens, you might want a telephoto lens like you see for press-photographers at sporting events. Each of these are considerable investments (as are lighting, flashes etc.) and you should realistically get the ones that are most suitable to you first. As you progress you can add to your range but certainly buying a £2k lens now in the hope it might make you money in the future is not a wise move unless you are very confident you'll get more than value from its purchase than it cost to buy it. I would highly recommend Ken Rockwell's site (http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/go-pro.htm) - it has taught me lots and has a section on 'going pro'. Hopefully someone else will provide more links for you soon enough. 194.221.133.226 (talk) 15:34, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I should have mentioned the business will be commercial photography. Weddings, portraits, kids, pets, corporate - that kind of thing. Thanks for the comments. Also, how do I indent my comments on wiki? Bikingshaun (talk) 15:44, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A full colon (:) will indent things 1 line, and multiples of that will do it more (so ::: would be three). 194.221.133.226 (talk) 16:00, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, Why did you mention that o anonymous one? Richard Avery (talk) 17:57, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Did you miss the bit where Bikingshaun asked the anon how to indent, thus leading the anon to explain? 79.66.88.153 (talk) 20:46, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well snubble my daggets, I clearly was not payin full attention. Thank you. Richard Avery (talk) 23:19, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
One issue you need to decide before anything else, is whether you will do film photography, digital photography, or both. Here's an idea for what you will need for each:
Film: You will need film cameras, film, a dark room, developing solution, etc. (assuming you would develop them yourself). You will also need storage facilities for film and negatives (preferable refrigerated).
Digital: You will need a digital camera, rechargeable batteries, a computer with digital editing software, a CD/DVD burner so you can make digital copies, USB ports for writing to pen drives, and a large hard drive (maybe a terabyte). You should also have a web site you can use to deliver pics electronically (e-mail doesn't tend to work for large numbers of hi-res pics).
Both: You may also want a scanner to convert film pics to digital.
In any case, you will need a studio with lights and backgrounds where people can pose for pics, and a business area with a cash register and appointment logbook. As time goes by (and digital resolution goes up), digital photography will be more popular than film. However, it may take decades for film photography to become entirely obsolete. Still, I'd be reluctant to invest my life savings in a technology that's on it's way out. StuRat (talk) 19:31, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There are always second hand equipment auctions or a photography shop that might be closing, had an ideea the whole film processing/photograph printing could be done by one machine, and there's a "black-out" box for handling film that means you won't need a darkroom. Camera-wise the film ones are extremely cheap now that digital is taking over. And for finessing, there's always Photoshop. Drop in to your local Photographers association, and any that have galleries for photography, for people who are happy to advise. Depending where you are there are small business advisory centres around with a software that finds markets and niches in particular areas where you might want to operate. Julia Rossi (talk) 21:24, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Probably the best thing you can do is find a photographer in your area who does the sort of work you want to do, and see if he'll take you on as an assistant or "second shooter". There's far more to being a professional photographer than having the right equipment. --Carnildo (talk) 23:54, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm keen amateur photographer with what others have said is a good eye for composition, and I have considered trying to sell some of my photographs with a view to perhaps pursuing a career as a professional photographer. I asked a friend of a friend who is a professional photographer, and he is of the opinion that just about all clients (companies, advertising, weddings) expect him to work in digital. However, there may be a few niches where medium-format film is still used - eg. fine art work. Astronaut (talk) 00:39, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
On the "SWOT analysis, demographic/geographic stats" front, don't worry about it. Formal things like that are only necessary if you're raising outside capital (like a bank loan). When you start with your own money, you only have to convince yourself that it's a good idea! And it sounds like you have.
My suggestion would be to price out the least expensive possible collection of used gear (from ebay or local used buy and sell websites) then ask yourself: Is there anything about this setup that I would find restrictive? If so, price it out with that item upgraded. After you do a few, you'll probably get a good feeling for where the best "value" is in terms of gear. Remember, you can always resell used gear later!
Marketing will likely be your next biggest cost. So stick to the essentials. I have used www.overnightprints.com for business cards. I suggest an order of full-sized double-sided cards for real sales leads and a set of cheap, monochrome white-paper cards for distribution at events.
Post ads in all of the free places: craigslist, used[yourcityname].com etc. If you have regular employment and want to ease into photography (evenings and weekends), take it slow and make sure you have plenty of cards around to build word-of-mouth at your first jobs. It probably makes sense to wait on getting a website until you have a portfolio, but once you do, work hard to give it a high google placement for the search term "photographer [city name]"
Most regions require local business licenses ("municipalities" in Canada or "counties" in the US). A little hint: since you'll be on the move mostly, you don't need to have a fixed address. If you have a family member or friend in an "outskirt of the city"-type area, business licenses are usually less expensive out there. Use that address/county.
[This part relates to Canada, since I only know Canadian tax law well. You may want to pay for a half hour of a local accountant's time to discuss how it works wherever you are. Don't let him charge you for a full hour, but keep him happy, because you might want to ask him to do your first year's tax return!] For tax purposes, you will be a "sole proprietorship." In this form of organization, you don't need a business name, but it doesn't hurt to have one. You don't need to register the business anywhere (this is just Canada though! ask someone!) if you use your own name. Make sure to record all of your revenue and expenses, because only the difference between the two gets added to your income for tax purposes. A separate bank account is useful, but not required (I would only get one if your bank offers a free one!) for reconciliation.
In terms of "admin" stuff, you'll want to download a free invoice template from the MS Word online template site for invoicing customers... This is all the stuff I can think of right now. I don't know what district or country you live in, but a google search for "starting a small business [state/province name] will usually get you to some fat-cat ministry or department whose overpaid denizens have created dozens of obtuse "how-to" guides, but can't seem to answer a phone or respond to an e-mail... NByz (talk) 08:44, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Since you're in the US, one of the easiest way to start would be as a franchise. [11], [12], [13], {http://www.franchisegenius.com/Childrens-Photography-Franchises/], [14] [15]. (Also check local department stores. one of the companies running their portrait studios might have a vacancy.} You'll usually get some training and help with setting up the business. Some banks will also be more likely to give small business loans to franchises than owner start-ups. You'll either have to buy or rent the equipment from the company. The profit margins aren't anything to write home about, so be sure to have a financial planner look through the contract to make sure you don't end up in debt. Check with the better business bureau and your chamber of commerce whether they know the franchise giver as reputable and what the prospects for your area would be. You could also try to expand your hobby first by doing school yearbooks and offering to take photos for restaurants, real estate agents, owners selling their house, gardening clubs and similar associations. You wouldn't need a fully equipped studio to do that, a quality digital camera would suffice. You can use the print shop at an office store to get your prints done. That way you could find out whether being a professional photographer is for you and gain some experience in the process. 76.97.245.5 (talk) 08:58, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That Bungled Presidential Oath.

So - the confused Chief Justice (appointed by Bush - opposed unsuccessfully by then Senator Obama) asked President-elect Obama, "Are you prepared to take the oath Senator?", and then totally embarrassed himself and Barack by mistaking his timing and the words themselves - and then next day in the White House Map Room re-presided over Mr. Obama's second oath-taking. Is it known whether on that second occasion if the now-chastened Chief Justice asked "Are you ready to take the oath Mr. President", or did he not apply any title so as to avoid further possible challenge or confusion? 92.8.117.55 (talk) 15:11, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

According to news sources he just said, "Are you ready to take the oath?" to which Obama replied, "I am. And we’re going to do it very slowly." ZING. [16] --98.217.14.211 (talk) 16:18, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And there was no challenge or confusion; the Constitution makes it clear that the President's term of office begins on January 20th at noon; the oath is required to actually execute his official duties. So "Mr President" would be correct; "Mr President who can sign a bill into law" perhaps less so. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 17:42, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Are we missing a "not" ? :-) StuRat (talk) 19:16, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No, I don't think so, as he said that Mr. President who can sign a bill into law is not correct. Thanks, Genius101Guestbook 20:43, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This came up before - it's clear that the new incumbent IS president from the stroke of noon - irrespective of oath taking. The constitution says he's got to take the oath before "executing" his office - which I presume means signing laws, making decrees and all the other stuff he does. Hence the Chief Justice most certainly should have addressed him as "President" on both the first and second occasions...even though Obama had the title - but not the powers.
This must be a great time to be a conspiracy theorist. They predict he'll take the oath on the Qur'an - but no - on the day of the inauguration he places his hand on a Bible...but NO! He doesn't actually take the oath, he messes up the words. Then - on the do-over - they keep cameras out of the room so nobody can SEE what he's swearing on - and it is subsequently reported that there was NO BIBLE - so what exactly did he actually swear the oath on? Eh? ha! Remember - you heard it here first!
SteveBaker (talk) 01:48, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I heard that the reason he bungled it was because he chose not to use index cards and tried to memorize it. Mistake. The Reader who Writes (talk) 03:35, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
By "he" - you mean the Chief Justice - right? Our Barack Obama 2009 presidential inauguration article makes it clear that Justice Roberts decided to wing it without notes - and he's supposed to lead the President through the oath. Initially, he screwed up - Obama stopped to give him a chance to sort himself out - which Roberts started to do when Obama evidently decided to follow Roberts' original words. Then they stumbled over each others words and somehow made it to the end without correcting the screwup. Anyway - Obama is not the first president to have to have 'do-over' later: Chester Arthur and Calvin Coolidge both messed up and had to redo the oath. Hoover got it wrong too (thanks to Chief Justice William Taft - who was also responsible for the Coolidge flub). But Hoover never did fix it - so there are probably a whole bunch of laws you could challenge if you were both insane and litigious! SteveBaker (talk) 04:57, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Chief Justice Roberts' version of the Presidential oath was somewhere between a nervous Ralph Kramden saying "Homina, homina, homina" when nervous, and Porky Pig saying "bi-dia, bi-dia, bi-dia, th-th-th-that's all folks!" By all means, when you are in the situation of having to utter certain words exactly correct, have them in front of you on a note card. The cost would be 1.7 cent or so. An alternative is writing it on the palm of the hand, if the notecard would be too costly. Practice is also useful, in developing the ability to issue required words with confidence. An older lady told me that she heard Franklin Roosevelt recite the oath without the usual prompting at one of his inaugurations. Accurate? Edison (talk) 05:49, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Steven Pinker has a good explanation of Roberts' flub: Roberts is something of a compulsive editor, adhering to the fallacy that split infinitives are against the rules in English. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 17:32, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
As the OP here - may I ask one last (semingly obvious question about the oath-taking), didn't the principals do a "dress-rehearsal"? - didn't Obama's advisors do a risk-assessment given his ethnicity, colour, middle-name, red-necked America resistance to his in-part Muslim background, and given that Justice Roberts is and was a Bush appointee who knew that Obama as Senator had tried to veto his appointment? Conspiracy theorist? Not me - but pragmatist? Certainly. 92.23.167.102 (talk) 19:51, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A good rule for life is to never ascribe to malice that which you can blame on incompetence. Roberts really had nothing to gain by messing it up - and his nervousness in the face of perhaps the largest live audience (and certainly one of the largest TV audiences) in history is only to be expected. If anyone came out of it looking bad - it was him. So, no - he screwed up - plain and simple. No harm done - and it lightened the moment a little - which is never a bad thing. SteveBaker (talk) 21:43, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Then let's hope and trust that as Chief of the US Supreme Court he doesn't rely in future tests of the US Constitution on his (faulty) memory when it comes to swearing in counsel - or don't they do that in the US? 92.23.167.102 (talk) 00:08, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Nope. One takes a written oath to be licensed to practice before the Supreme Court. I, .......... , do solemnly swear (or affirm) that as an attorney and as a counselor of this Court, I will conduct myself uprightly and according to law, and that I will support the Constitution of the United States. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 00:40, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Muslim ladies in Toronto during summer season

I notice that the Arab Muslim women, Somali Muslim women, Iranian Muslim women, Afghani Muslim women wear clothings according to the season, but they don't wear sandals or any open-toe shoes. On the other hand, the Muslim women of India, Pakistan and Bangladesh do wear sandals. Why the Arab, Somali, Iranian, Afghani Muslim ladies don't wear sandals in the summer? Is it because they are afraid of some men who will look their feet? I am sorry to the brothers and sisters of Islam if I have asked this horrible question? Please forgive me. Only Muslim ladies of Arab and Somali ancestry will answer, please and thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.204.74.168 (talk) 18:20, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you only want answers from Muslim ladies of Arab and Somali ancestry, and only from them, you're asking in the wrong place. First of all, there may not be a lot of them hanging around the Ref Desk, and more importantly -- as I'm just now demonstrating, seeing as I'm not a Muslim, or a lady, or of Arab and Somali ancestry -- you can't dictate terms on who gets to answer your question. In fact, attempting to do so is probably going to annoy people a little bit. -- Captain Disdain (talk) 23:10, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Why do you consider this a horrible question? It's perfectly healthy to (discreetly) categorize people by their nationalities and sandal preferences, so long as you don't let it overwhelm your relationships with them as individual human beings. See paraphilia and foot fetish for more. --Sean 23:24, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I ain't no Muslim lady, but I can google! Read this sandal-based fatwa (religious ruling):[17]. It would appear that strict Muslim women should not wear open-toed sandals. So it's probably just the case that those women from the subcontinent are not quite as orthodox. Fribbler (talk) 17:19, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Freedom of information and wiretapping/surveillance

In the UK or America, would someone be able to use freedom of information laws to find out if the government was monitoring them? If not, when does information on these operations get released if it is never used in court? Sorry if this sounds like a legal advice question, but it's meant as a question about the legal system. Thanks 86.8.176.85 (talk) 22:08, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Issue of national security are exempt, as they are with access under the Data Protection Act. This may well include most people under surveillance. Besides, there's a somewhat 'common sense' attitude here in the UK, since they stopped people demanding the number of Frerro Roché the government got through. - Jarry1250 (t, c) 22:12, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In the US, no, you could not find out if you were the target of an on-going investigation with FOIA laws. That would follow under Exemption 7, at the very least. You could find out after the fact though—plenty of people have requested their FBI files from decades earlier (you can only request someone's FBI file if you are the subject of the file in question or the subject of the file is deceased; you attach an obituary to prove it in the latter case!). It would be interesting to see exactly what reply an agency would have to give if they were investigating you and you filed a FOIA on yourself... if their investigation of you was meant to be secret at that part, I imagine there's some way they could say "we've got no idea what you're talking about," but I don't know where they get the option to do that. If they said, "we can't tell you that because of Exemption 7", that might give away that they in fact were monitoring them. Probably they'd just say, "we can't confirm or deny or anything, but if we were monitoring you, exemption 7 would cover us now, but we'd say that to anyone who asked." But I don't know for sure. --98.217.14.211 (talk) 23:31, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Exemption 7 seems clear enough. If you ask them whether they're investigating you, they could give you a stock answer and say that if there was an ongoing investigation, they wouldn't comment on it -- or they could even just lie. There's nothing illegal about American cops lying to people in the course of an investigation; it happens all the time. There are some exceptions to this, which mostly have to do with civil rights (for example, cops can't legally tell an arrested suspect that he doesn't have the right to counsel), but there's nothing to stop them from lying during an undercover operation ("no, of course I'm not a cop") or an interview ("well, look, I can tell you just got in over your head here and I know that asshole was asking for it, so tell you what: if you write down exactly what you did and apologize for it, maybe we can get the judge to go easy on you, huh?"), or in any number of other situations related to an investigation. I don't see how this is any different, really. -- Captain Disdain (talk) 01:11, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]


January 23

Rubik's cube:: V-cubes 6&7

I am a rubiks cube enthusiast and I really want to buy the new Vcubes 6 and 7: but the problem is that they are way too much expensive. they are currently priced at 39Euros ($51.87) for V6, and 48 Euros ($63.84) for V7. I'd really like to buy both of them, but they are way too much expensive for a 14 yr old like me. My parents aren't as much understanding as i'd like them to be: they don't understand why I need to spend so much money on such nonessentials ("children's toys" they call them) so asking my parents for money is pretty much out of the question. so my question is: Is there any chance that the prices will go down in the future? How long do you think it will take, and how much will the price go down? And (I know this is probably stupid to ask, but still) is there a place where i can get them at a cheaper price?? Thankyou everyone!!Johnnyboi7 (talk) 01:25, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you can wait a few years you will be able to pick them up second hand for much lower prices. If they turn out to be popular they will be cloned when the patent expires in under 20 years and there will be many cheap imitations around. And the second hand market will be full of cubes that people don't want anymore. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 01:52, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This doesn't answer your question directly but you could try a Google search on "teenager earn money". hydnjo talk 02:43, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
More on the earning money thing, you could buy one with your own earned money to show your parents how much you really want them. The Reader who Writes (talk) 03:38, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Thanks guys again for your thoughtful advices...all of you..

Additional question: For those of you who have purchased the vcube(s) already, is it actually worth all that money?? I mean, i already own a professor's cube(555) and a rubik's revenge(444) (they're both eastsheen products). is it any more exciting or challenging? with professor's and revenge it was really fun for me , since I could only solve the normal 333 at first, and i had no idea how to even begin solving a 444 or 555 so it was a big challenge for me. now i have overcome that challenge and after a few months they have lost their magic -- it doesn't attract me as it used to: it feels no different from the ordinary 333. I guess i could just try doing it on computer softwares (like gabbasoft) but mouse clicking can be quite irritable and rotating the cube to see the opposite side can be rather difficult. It just isn't the same as actually having it in the palm of your hand and physically rotating it. It has a subtle satisfaction that only cubists can appreciate.

So, is it much different from professors and revenge?? Is it actually worth the absurdly ridiculous price??? or would it be better off to be contempt with having professors and revenge, and trying the new ones out on the computer?? And how good are v-cube products compared to "Rubiks original" or Eastsheen? Apparently they have improved its mechanisms, but are they any smoother??Johnnyboi7 (talk) 09:58, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure about Europe, but in Canada at least, you can get a job at some fast-food restauraunts or Tim Hortons when you turn 14, and newspaper delivery jobs (but with much lower pay) are availible at a younger age still, as are other "jobs" such as snow shovelling. Or, another possibility is to win a contest (one that doesn't require you to be at age of majority, which is rare!) and save up the money. Or you could save up allowance over a long period. ~AH1(TCU) 16:31, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Priapus Garden Gnomes descended from Greek fertility god?

I was recently doing some research for a paper I'm doing, and I saw that some scholars think that the traditional garden gnome is somehow related to the Greek god Priapus, most famous for his tremendous phallus. I'm just wondering why anyone would ever compare the expedia spokesman with a tremendously well hung mythological character. It just doesn't seem to make sense.

Any answers are welcome. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Schmopper25 (talkcontribs) 02:13, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's not Expedia - it's Travelocity. SteveBaker (talk) 05:58, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
We have a page for Priapus, and it gives a little bit of info on the garden gnome thing, and it has a number of sources listed at the bottom that you may find potentially useful. Cherry Red Toenails (talk) 03:36, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The reason for the ExpediaTravelocity mascot is to do with the Travelling gnome prank (jeez - we have an article about that?!!!).
It was common (at least as far back as the mid 1970's when I did this) to steal garden gnomes and to terrible things to them - principally because their owners are exhibiting a kind of canonical bad taste. In the 1976 University of Kent "Rag week" (a traditional British university charitable fundraising event) we spent most of one night with several hundred students scouring the gardens of the City of Canterbury for gnomes - which were kidnapped and brought to the hill on which the university sits - where each had a small ransom attached - with the money going to some worthy cause. Sadly, even though the ransom was a tiny amount of money (like 20p to 50p depending on the ugliness of the gnome and the presence or otherwise of fishing rod) we were actually happy to give back the gnomes for free - and the local police were carefully turning a blind eye to our activities, only a fraction of the several hundred gnomes we kidnapped were ever claimed. The owners who claimed them were happy to do so and most gave us much more than we asked. The pile of unclaimed gnomes we ended up tossing into the trash was one of the more bizarre sights I can recall in my life. Still, we did manage to raise the tone of that historic city by the large-scale elimination of the red-hatted vermin.
Anyway - one particularly popular form of Gnome prank is to steal one - then send it on a long trip, taking photos at every stop and sending them back (anonymously) to the original owner as postcards. This became known as a "Travelling Gnome" (yes, we have an article about THAT too!) - and that's where ExpediaTravelocity got the idea from. (And we even have an article about that! Where is my Gnome?).
Somewhere in this answer there should be the words "Garden Gnome Liberationists"...but that's just an excuse for ANOTHER silly link!
Weird - but true. SteveBaker (talk) 05:35, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Aging and Alcohol

Are there any alcohol beverages (ie rum, whiskey, beer, etc) that do NOT require aging? If so, what are they? Thanks, Aiuw 04:21, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Beaujolais nouveau - famously! This would be a longer reply - but it turns out that this is my 15,000th Wikipedia edit and my hands hurt. SteveBaker (talk) 04:34, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Well, depends on what you mean by aging. If you mean ingredients that do not include ethanol, that you can just mix together, and which instantly turn into an alcoholic beverage, nope. But you can get alcohol pretty quickly, in just a few days, although chances are that it'll taste really awful and give you explosive diarrhea: behold the Finnish wonder, kilju. I recommend it like I recommend a punch to the kidneys. (It was also discussed on the Ref Desk last year, though in a somewhat different context.) There are also other alcoholic beverages that go through a very quick fermentation process, such as Beaujolais nouveau.
And here's to the next 15,000, Steve. -- Captain Disdain (talk) 04:44, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"Ageing" refers to any of several unrelated processes:
  • Letting the material get old so that, as the flavor compounds break down, new flavor compounds emerge.
  • Letting the material get exposed to "cultures" (molds, funguses, bacterias, yeasts, etc.) so that the action on the material by the cultures adds new flavors.
  • Storing the material in a medium which itself adds flavor (such as wooden barrels).
Most varieties of alcohol are aged by the first and third methods. In terms of alcohol which is "unaged" the two best that I can think of are moonshine (aka White Lightning, corn whiskey, hooch, etc.) and Vodka. Most aged "whiskeys" are essentially Vodka and/or corn whiskey which is left to sit in wooden barrels; the brown color comes from the way that the neutral spirit extracts compounds from the wood. There are also unaged rums, such as white rum; unaged tequilas, such as white, blanco, silver, or platinum tequilas. If you want an unaged spirit, you are usually looking for a clear, colorless spirit. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 05:07, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Some beers don't require much time to make. IIRC ale fermentation is done in a small number of days; it will then need two or three more days once the cask is tapped before it's ready to drink. The time between racking (filling the cask) and tapping can be a little while, but that's typically just for the practicalities of transport - I don't believe there's any minimum time required for that part of the process. 93.97.184.230 (talk) 09:03, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That's just to give it a chance to settle down after being shaken up by the transportation (the quickest way to get something into a cellar is to drop it, after all). If you tap it too soon, it will fizz up and make a terrible mess (just like opening a can of coke just after it's been dropped). I think the reason you leave it for a bit after tapping it is because you need to let all the bits settle back down to the bottom so they don't end up beer when you serve it. --Tango (talk) 02:45, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Those mechanical aspects are part of it, yes, but they're not the whole story. I used to be involved in organising a medium-sized beer festival (70-100 beers), including being part of the team deciding whether a particular beer was ready to be served yet. (The vast majority would be by opening night, but typically a few needed a little more time.) It's by no means uncommon to have a beer that has dropped bright ("bits settle[d] back down") but still tastes "green" or not-ready. Keeping the room too cold is a good way of causing this problem. 93.97.184.230 (talk) 12:14, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think I remember recently reading where they are fairly successfully artificially aging wines in less than 10 minutes. Dmcq (talk) 11:47, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes there was an article in New Scientist about using high voltage. It's briefly mentioned in Aging of wine. Perhaps not surprisingly, it's the Chinese who seem most interested in it in recent times Nil Einne (talk) 09:41, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I believe pruno has a relatively quick turnaround time. Tomdobb (talk) 14:35, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I am among those who think that champagne should be drunk young, likewise ice wine. --Milkbreath (talk) 14:52, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The new wines of Vienna's heurigen are meant to be drunk very young.[18] Rmhermen (talk) 17:03, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Fruit wine is best when consumed young, especially if it's home made. 76.97.245.5 (talk) 17:26, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

US Tax deduction

Hello, I was wondering, do you HAVE to file deductions? I filed my taxes early and I forgot that I had paid interest on a student load. I received a form today that would allow me to deduct the interest if I were to refile my taxes. I paid so little interest that I dont really care about deducting it, I'd much rather not refile it. Can I just leave it like that? 24.7.33.175 (talk) 06:04, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, you are allowed to pay more than the required amount of taxes in the U.S. But this is only discussion, and does not constitute legal or financial/tax advice, for which you should consult an attorney or credentialed financial advisor. Edison (talk) 06:10, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
From personal experience, overpaying federal income taxes may result in you getting a nastygram detailing your red tape inferiority and threatening an audit... along with a refund check for the amount you screwed up. It's a comical combination. — Lomn 13:56, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have received the refund check without the nastygram or audit threat after miscalculation of my tax liability in the government's favor. I'm not sure whether the government monitors student loan interest payments such that it would even discover your error, and it is certainly no crime to overpay the government. Note that none of us are qualified to offer legal or financial advice. Marco polo (talk) 15:24, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's possible your deductions add up to less than the standard deduction, in which case, it wouldn't matter anyway. Tomdobb (talk) 15:41, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The deduction for student loan interest is a separate line item; it's not part of your itemized deductions, and can be claimed even if you don't itemize. Of course it's more complicated than that, as it always is — in particular there's a maximum amount that can be claimed, an income cap for being allowed to claim the full amount, and a phase-out past that, and maybe other complications that I don't recall at the moment. But I wouldn't want readers who know they're not going to itemize to simply forget about deducting student loan interest if they're eligible to do so. --Trovatore (talk) 22:11, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A problem may arise if you claim the deduction in a following year or if you claim other items related to that loan. That is because there's a smudge in the paper trail for them. If you happen to get audited they might see fit to claim that you didn't have a student loan from that year on or some such. Authorities tent to be highly suspicious of honest citizens. 76.97.245.5 (talk) 05:43, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Random articles

When you click on the random article link in the navigation box, is there a chance you might get a sex-related article? --Crackthewhip775 (talk) 06:06, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. Edison (talk) 06:08, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
RANDOM means RANDOM, there's no telling what article will pop up. FYI: Don't click it at school/work/other place where looking at that means trouble.  Buffered Input Output 14:04, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have the vaguest possible recollection that Random article isn't actually random, but rather picked from a very small rapidly-shifting pool of articles. I've clicked Random a few times in rapid succession and actually gotten the same article again. 64.26.68.82 (talk) 19:26, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In my very considerable experience - it's very hard to get ANYTHING except articles about Japanese railway stations. But the question about randomness has been asked before - there are some exceedingly subtle non-random things involved because (from memory) it actually does something like picking a random hash-table key rather than a strictly random article. That exerts a very subtle bias to not pick articles that happen to share a hash key with greater or fewer other articles...but because the hash function is rather good - that doesn't bias the results in any systemic way. It's a VERY subtle effect though. SteveBaker (talk) 21:24, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The random article question, or a variant thereof, surely must be among the most often asked on the Ref Desks (along with questions about sex; this one gets bonus points for including both!) I personally recall it being asked three or four times. Anyway, for those of a technical bent, the way it works is described at Wikipedia:FAQ/Technical#Is the "random article" feature really random? Rockpocket 04:33, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hey - any question I can answer without having to use the word 'coprophagia' is a win. SteveBaker (talk) 16:19, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Even if you don't get to mention aardvarks? Algebraist 16:22, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Aardvarqs have very little mouths and much, much, bigger pooh - I don't think they can be coprophagic.SteveBaker (talk) 17:17, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
When I click random article, I find that I get either a geographical stub or a biographical stub half the time. ~AH1(TCU) 16:24, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. But that doesn't imply any lack of randomness. Perhaps half of our articles are about people or places? It wouldn't surprise me. Our average article length is something like 300 words - so the fact that so many of them are stubs is also unsurprising. SteveBaker (talk) 17:17, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Same here. 80% of what I find are geographical stubs that don't take up enough room on the page to have a scroll bar, and 15% are start-quality biographical articles. One time I found an article on a dock in New Zealand, no joke. Tezkag72 03:50, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Japanese railway stations? You're lucky. All the gods of randomness ever give me are cricket teams! :-)
Seriously, there's a FAQ entry on this, and a discussion on the village pump. APL (talk) 06:36, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How does one go from Roswell, New Mexico, into Mexico?

A friend (an author) is writing a book and he wants to know the following:

If one were in Roswell, New Mexico and one wanted to travel South and illegally cross the border, what would be the quickest way to do it (assuming one was happy to shoot border patrol agents)? Geographically it looks like going down into one of the small border towns like Ojinaga might be an idea, but having never been there, I've no idea how busy these parts of the border are or what the security's like?

Thanks in advance.--Rixxin (talk) 11:03, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If he wants "quickest" and is willing to blast through security, then why does he care what the security is like? Google Maps suggests that Alamogordo to El Paso is the quickest way. Otherwise, I think he needs to redevelop his criteria. — Lomn 14:02, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I strongly suspect that an American citizen would have little difficulty crossing the border into Mexico at one of the legitimate border crossings (assuming of course they have a valid passport, no illegal weapons/drugs and are not wanted by the authorities).
If it really must be done illegally, I read somewhere that it is possible to wade across the Rio Bravo in many places along the Texas border. However, I suspect that the US border patrol is aware of this and have a long fence primarily designed to keep illegal imigrants out of the USA. Perhaps you could seek the help of illegal imigrants in Roswell and ask them how they came to the USA; and then reverse their route. Astronaut (talk) 14:24, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's true that an American citizen can typically get into Mexico legally just by showing a driver's license, so there is no need for heroic measures. (Crossing the border in the opposite direction is definitely harder.) If the Mexican authorities were on the lookout to stop someone from crossing, though, the border fence along the Rio Grande extends no further east than Fort Hancock, Texas, according to this blog. If someone needed to cross into Mexico illegally, he or she could drive east on I-10 to the next exit east of Fort Hancock, near Mc Nary, Texas, then drive a short ways to the river, get out of the car, and wade across the river into Mexico. To stay mostly dry, that person could bring an inflatable dinghy in the car and row across at night (to avoid being conspicuous), since the river is sluggish at that point. Marco polo (talk) 15:21, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Wouldn't the quickest way be to take a flying saucer ? :-) StuRat (talk) 16:29, 23 January 2009 (UTC) [reply]
Or a black helicopter? --Rixxin (talk) 16:32, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My friend thanks you all for your replies.--Rixxin (talk) 16:32, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lomn, here's a reply for you:
I probably should've clarified that my dude IS wanted by the police. Yes, he's willing to shoot a few guys but there's a difference between shooting two half asleep security guards in a hut and trying to shoot fifty dudes with machine guns, high tech cameras and a fence the size of Paris.
--Rixxin (talk) 16:36, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I figured on the wanted thing. Unfortunately, I don't have any practical experience with evading law enforcement, etc, etc. However, I'll toss out an alternate idea:
  • Major roads, of which few exist around Roswell, are easily checkpointed (I'm assuming that we're going with some sort of steal-the-UFO-secrets thing, given Roswell). If it is a steal-UFOs thing, then I think it's reasonable that the gov't decides the checkpoints are acceptable.
  • Quickly reaching Mexico is perhaps not the real objective (rather, safely reaching Mexico is) -- in other words, speed doesn't really matter provided it's the sort of thing that can be done in three days or so.
  • As a result, the real plot point looks to me to be "how do I ditch Roswell?" rather than "how do I cross the border?" Once that's solved, any sleepy crossing into Mexico (or for that matter, Canada) should do. — Lomn 17:14, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Should the Reference Desk really be advising people how to illegally enter a country? Tomdobb (talk) 17:02, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The tradition seems to be that giving legal advice is prohibited, but giving illegal advice is OK.  :) --Sean 17:42, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, why not. (Should Wikipedia contain information on how to commit suicide? Or how to inject intravenous drugs? Sure. Wikipedia is not censored.) -- Captain Disdain (talk) 19:46, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I was primarily curious if it fell within the scope of "no legal advice." Tomdobb (talk) 19:51, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think it comes anywhere near it, particularly as we're talking about fiction here. -- Captain Disdain (talk) 20:04, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Either way. I was just curious. Tomdobb (talk) 20:12, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Title please

This is bugging me. Please help. US Airforce officer in Iceland takes command of US Marine and (later) British Special Forces troops. Maintains observation on invading forces. Is awarded the Navy Cross.86.194.250.77 (talk) 16:34, 23 January 2009 (UTC)DT[reply]

Are you perhaps thinking of Tom Clancy's novel Red Storm Rising in which the Russian military invades Iceland and a met officer at Keflavik evades and goes to ground. Nanonic (talk) 16:53, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, that's almost certainly it. I really enjoyed that book. ~ mazca t|c 18:22, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
As a side note, this is a prime example of a confusing Ref Desk question: Once "Red Storm Rising" was mentioned, I recognized it, but before that I had no clue. My first thought was that he was asking about the title the officer in question held or perhaps received as a result, and I thought this must be some kind of an obscure WW2 thing. It would've been helpful if there had been just a little more information provided -- like a note that the question was about a book, not real life. Still, Nanonic figured it out, so what the hell. -- Captain Disdain (talk) 19:38, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And I thought they were looking for the name of the officer, not his title/rank. It would have helped if the question had been on the Entertainment desk since the question was about a book. Dismas|(talk) 19:59, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Literature is the Humanities desk, and I assume that's intended to include popular fiction. If there had been a movie version, that would be Entertainment. --Anonymous, 06:12 UTC, January 24, 2009.

Oh dear ! I seem to have upset an ant's nest. Sorry, I'll try to do better next time. (I had thought 'title' was sufficient to distinguish a book but underestimated the analytical ability of the Wikipedians and their desire to be precise.) But, yes, thank you. You have provided what I was so bugged about. Now I shall locate a copy and re-read it. a bientôt.86.197.150.220 (talk) 11:29, 24 January 2009 (UTC)DT[reply]

Hey, no harm done -- after all, one of us figured it out with ease and you got the answer you were looking for, so it's all good. I was really making more of a generic observation here. -- Captain Disdain (talk) 22:06, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
One of the things to recognise is people often ignore the title of questions if they're just reading the question. A good title is useful to help people know what the question is about before reading and to find the question again but unless it's obvious from the question not everyone is going to read or notice the title. The other thing is even though in theory a movie or TV series should go into the entertainment desk there's no guarantee it always happens. If you just say title please as opposed to saying "Does anyone know the title of the book which had this" or something people are not going to know you're talking about a book, they may think you're referring to a movie, TV series, even an opera or song. Since you knew it was a book, it's helpful to specify that as it's not generally much use someone thinking of the TV series they've watched if you're asking about a book Nil Einne (talk) 07:55, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Obama Inauguration Transcripts

"What the cynics fail to understand is that the ground has shifted beneath them, that the stale political arguments that have consumed us for so long, no longer apply.

MR. The question we ask today is"

What does "MR" mean in that last sentence, it's in every single transcript I've found.169.229.75.128 (talk) 19:04, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's not in this version on the ABC News site. And it's not in this version on the White House site. Likely the MR is a stray typo that got repeated as different outlets pasted the copy in. --- OtherDave (talk) 19:35, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why are boogers yellowish green?

Kind of a stupid question, until I started thinking about it. They're pretty much all the same color. What is in the air or bloodstream that assigns every booger this range of the electro-magnetic spectrum?--THE WORLD'S MOST CURIOUS MAN (talk) 23:09, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Presumably Mucus is the main cause of the colour, but not 100% sure. ny156uk (talk) 23:39, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, the color seems to vary from whitish to yellow to green, according to the German Wikipedia article on snot and other sources. The reason for the yellow or green color has to do with cells called neutrophyls. This article gives a fair explanation for why snot is sometimes green when there is an infection. I think that air pollution can also lead to a greyish discoloration of yellow snot so that it looks green. Marco polo (talk) 03:35, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, air pollution turns your snot grey or even black! Spend a fortnight in London and see for yourself!--TammyMoet (talk) 15:07, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Not all "boogers" are mucus. Some are solid and dry (and if there's any blood on it, then it's red). ~AH1(TCU) 16:13, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Old Renaissance Festival joke, depends on knowing that a "Festie" is a person who travels to many such festivals during the season: You Might Be a Festie if ... you can tell which fest you're at by the color of your boogers!
--DaHorsesMouth (talk) 22:24, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Will you get arrested if you travel to restricted countries?

At least when you return? I've always wondered how they enforced this. I dont plan to travel to these hellholes, but I wonder about people with families down there. Sorry if this is legal advice.--Hey, I'm Just Curious (talk) 23:26, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What country are you in, and what country are you asking about travel to? Algebraist 23:43, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In recent history, US Government has effectively restricted its citizens (in some way) from setting foot in just four countries: Cuba from 1961, North Korea from 1950, Iraq from 1990 and Libya from 1981. Recently Iraq, Libya and North Korea have all had their restrictions lifted, leaving only Cuba. But its worth noting that, contrary to popular belief, US citizens are actually not banned from going to Cuba. US passports are accepted, and there is no legal barrier from visiting from the US side, but there are other restrictions that make it practically challenging.
The major issue is the Trading with the Enemy Act, which means it is illegal for US citizens to spend any money in Cuba. Ist difficult to visit without spending a single cent. There are special licenses available from the Office of Foreign Assets Control, that excludes certain people from the regulations (journalists, scientists, students and people with specific family situations). In theory, if you visit without one of these licenses then your risk being prosecuted and/or fined when you return to US soil. The penalties are not trivial either: up to 10 years in prison, $1,000,000 and $250,000 in individual fines per violation. Civil penalties up to $55,000 per violation may also be imposed.
In practice, however, when Americans travel via a third country and plan their trip carefully, then it is highly unlikely that they have any problems. Indeed, many thousands of Americans visit illegally, without licenses, each year. The Cuban authorities take great delight in having US citizens visit Cuba against their Government's wishes, so they don't usually stamp US passports on arrival or departure. So there isn't really any evidence that they have been, so long as they are careful. That said, the US Government claim to have observers in third countries that will document US citizens visiting Cuba. They probably do too, but really don't care that much unless you are already a person of interest to them. If you are thinking of visiting Cuba personally, then you should seek professional advice before doing anything. Notwithstanding you risk breaking a federal law, there are also real dangers in visiting a state that lacks diplomatic/consular representation from your own country. Rockpocket 05:16, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Um...but don't a lot of North Americans visit Cuba while on vacation? ~AH1(TCU) 16:09, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Not a lot of Americans, no. Tourism in Cuba gives the numbers as 600,000 Canadians and 30,000 Americans. This compares to 450,000 Canadians and 928,000 Americans who visited the top Caribbean destination for "North Americans", the Dominican Republic in 2004. The Bahamas and Jamaica both also claim that title with the Bahamas receiving huge numbers of cruise ship passenger (3.6 million visitors to an island group with a population of 300,000, wow) Rmhermen (talk) 17:48, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A lot of Canadians go to Cuba simply because they do not expect to find Americans there; not because they don't like Americans, but because it is funny to do something Americans can't. But Canadians don't travel to Havana or anywhere like that, they go to the resorts just like everyone else. Also, I can't find any numbers, but it's possible that more Canadians go to Turks and Caicos than Cuba or the Dominican; there was some semi-serious talk about having the islands officially join Canada a few years ago. Adam Bishop (talk) 18:19, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Chaos Theory. Is this a croc, or what?

I moved this question over to the Science desk, where it's more at home and the answers are more likely to be thoroughly awesome. -- Captain Disdain (talk) 00:22, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah - over here, we just have to say "No"! (I've replied on the science desk). SteveBaker (talk) 01:54, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

January 24

forwarding articles

Dear sirs;

Please explain how I can forward your articles or pages. I have "hotmail" as a server and they do not deal with "outlook express" which pops up with a right click.

Thank you...The novice, Mont Monaco

P.S. I searched but couldn't find an area where this question was presented. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mont monaco (talkcontribs) 04:04, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It would be VASTLY better to email the URL of the page rather than the entire page itself. Aside from anything else, many pages use 'fair use' photographs that it might be illegal for you to copy. SteveBaker (talk) 04:10, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Not that I'd recommend emailing entire Wikipedia pages, and not that I am giving or capable of giving legal advice, but it would seem that any photographs (etc.) that were deemed "fair use" on Wikipedia would be similarly deemed "fair use" in personal communications (perhaps not as part of a business newsletter, though). From Fair use: "Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 17 U.S.C. § 106 and 17 U.S.C. § 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright." [emphasis added] -- 74.137.108.115 (talk) 23:12, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Private Email to my friend Adam Arkin

I was in contact with Adam Arkin whilst still with his own Adam Arkin site, but have since closed down, and I havent been able to find him since. Please let me know how I can email him again. I am in Australia, and would dearly love to chat to him again. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.161.149.166 (talk) 15:06, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You might try finding his old site at http://www.archive.org/index.php - type his OLD url into the search box and it if you've lead a clean and honest life, up will pop his old web site - and hopefully his email address will still be there. Good luck! SteveBaker (talk) 15:12, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note, if the address you used to contact him was an account associated with the site then the address might be gone as well. Dismas|(talk) 19:30, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The usual advice about contacting someone in showbiz or publishing is to write c/o his agent. —Tamfang (talk) 22:08, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

orlando, florida

how long does it take to travel by car from Orlando to Plant City, Florida? (or vice versa) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.109.133.92 (talk) 15:58, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

According to Google Maps [19], it's 66.5 miles and will take about one hour and 14 minutes. --Thomprod (talk) 16:12, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

US War Deficit of $1trillion.

I have read that ex-President Bush's legacy will be remembered as a $1trillion deficit in the US economy caused by his involvement in Iraq and Afghanisatn. Be that as it may, and without aspiring to begin a chain of justification or denouncement responses, is it pragmatically reasonable of me to assume that such expenditure, however effectual or otherwise it may ultimately be judged to have been in pursuit of Bush's political ambitions, has at the very least created a source of jobs, materiels acquisition, production, distribution, research and development, wealth creation, and other fiscal and economic stimulus benefits - not just for and in the USA, but also for and in those other countries that have manufactured, supplied and consumed said materiel, in and by the opposing factions, such as Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan, not to mention, Iran and Russia (and any other nation that I am not aware of as having been involved)? 92.23.31.56 (talk) 20:24, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is really a matter of speculation - and we don't like to speculate here on the RD. It's not really reasonable to assume that the only way Bush could think of to create jobs (advance technology, etc) was to spend a terabuck on fighting two wars. The consequence of fighting two wars might be those benefits - but that's never going to be the reason. For once we'll have a way to prove that because the nation is about to spend another terabuck on doing economic stimulus the OTHER way. SteveBaker (talk) 20:33, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
War certainly creates jobs and helps the economy, but it usually does so at the expense of other things. The money that was spent on the war could have been spent on other things or saved (either by the government, or by the public through lower taxes). War encourages spending, rather than saving, which is usually a good thing in the short term and a bad thing in the long term. It's all a matter of balancing pros and cons, as with anything else. --Tango (talk) 20:37, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In general, spending money on any activity will have the type of benefits you listed, war included. However, that doesn't mean that all such spending is equally beneficial. Spending a trillion on free college for any American who can meet admission requirements, for example, would be far more beneficial to the US than the war in Iraq, due to the primary benefit of providing a more skilled workforce, and would also have similar secondary benefits of reducing unemployment and crime, increasing R&D, etc. This is phrased by economists as the opportunity cost, what was given up to fund the war, in this case. StuRat (talk) 21:14, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Increasing the skill level of your workforce is only beneficial if you have skilled jobs for them at the end of it - there's no point giving someone a college education if the only job they can get afterwards is sweeping roads, and somebody has to sweep the roads, so that puts an upper bound of the proportion of the workforce it is worth educating to that level. --Tango (talk) 01:36, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Except that more educated workforce also increases the likelyhood of someone creating a robotic road sweeper! There are not simply a fixed number of jobs availible at each education level; increasing education also increased the demand for higher education because the number of entrepreneurs would increase as well... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 01:59, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's relatively rare to have an over-educated workforce. I believe that this may be the case is some parts of India, but not in the US, which currently needs to import highly skilled workers such as doctors, scientists, and engineers. StuRat (talk) 05:19, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You'd be better off just giving the money away. The problem with spending it on war is that it employs the fit as soldiers and the intelligent as weapons makers. Neither are very productive and if the money was given to the weak and stupid instead they would still spend the money and the strong and intelligent might actually do something useful instead of wasting their lives. Dmcq (talk) 18:38, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relaxing things that would lend themselves to being an online game.

My sister is putting together a web site for her business [20] - which is one of those "Life coaching" things. She's trying to attract more visitors to her site and we're thinking that we'd get more incoming links and boost her Google page rank if she had some fun things there that people would link to and spread around. What she wants is some games (perhaps 'activities') of a relaxational or de-stressing kind. A classic example - she saw a site that has 'virtual bubble-wrap' for you to pop [21] - and she would like other things like that. As the family's resident game programmer - I get to implement whatever it turns out to be.

I'm thinking of things like stroking a virtual cat - or maybe games like SameGame or something that people might find non-stressful. Personally, there are times when a "machine gunning down my coworkers" game would be de-stressing but apparently that's more distressing than destressing!

What games or activities do people find relaxing and/or de-stressing? SteveBaker (talk) 20:25, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Word games? I saw one site that had famous quotations where the words were scrambled. The author of the quote wasn't displayed, so that added a level of difficulty but they weren't timed or anything like that which would add anxiety and stress. Many people also find Sudoku to be relaxing. Dismas|(talk) 20:36, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
PS You might want to reduce the size of those images. Even on DSL the page took at least 30 seconds to load. Dismas|(talk) 20:39, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes - I know. Job number one (which I just started this afternoon) is to fix up the site so it works smoothely...it's crap for several other reasons too: Everyone looks at it and sees three menu options - not noticing the little scroll arrows either side of the menu that reveal half a dozen other menu options. I looked at the web page stats - the main page got over 1000 hits so far - the two other pages you can get to immediately got ~800 hits - and the pages that you have to click the arrows to get to got 5 hits each! My sister didn't get the 'geek' genes that I inherited and she used some kind of freebie automatic web site generator...well, you get what you pay for.)...anyway - I don't want to derail this question into one about web site design. Think relaxing, calming thoughts...deep breath...let it out S-L-O-W-L-Y. Try not to think about how horrible CSS and JavaScript are. :-) SteveBaker (talk) 21:46, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Here's some:
  • A while ago I wrote a little python/pygame program (but it should be just as easy in javascript) which a) generated a random colour, b) generated its compliment (just 180 degree rotation of hue in HSV space) c) generated several "buddy colours" for each, by jittering each h,s,v value by a random amount up to about 10% d) draw squares in each colour e) wait a few seconds then goto a. This, it turns out, is all rather mesmeric - you just sit and watch the pretty colour combinations (which the algorithm guarantees all work quite nicely together). With a nice black or charcoal background that should be rather zen. Warning - you can do this without reading the color difference article, which will only make you sad.
  • A while ago I designed a website. The customer insisted on a splash screen (no, I couldn't talk them out of it). For it I had four square images, each that cycled through a few pretty photos (viva istockphoto) with nice javascript+css fading. The clever bit was that I set the animation speed (just the delay on the fader timeout) differently (they're not quite relatively coprime, but the net time-until-identical is still very long) - so the images are shown in different combinations an (apparently) random fashion. Again, it's quite calming to watch. Get some nice calming stock photos, and add in to one cycle her company's logo.
  • (this all the way back to my beloved C=64) Draw a range of images that have small circles on them (tiny, small, medium, big, huge), then write javascript that cycles a given div through them in a pulsing order (tsmbhbmst...) on a timer. Then arrange several hundred on the page (I'm really thinking of even "huge" being 20px in diameter, so not really huge at all), but have their initial condition be like smooth natural-looking contours (like a map of the cotswolds). Then set all of them off cycling together - you'll see rippling patterns moving in and out - all a bit TOTP.1977.
Let us know how it works out. 87.113.74.22 (talk) 22:19, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I was watching a programme about a Victorian Farm and one of the participants remarked that sawing a log was "remarkably Zen", by which I take it he means a repetitive, boring activity that somehow switches your mind off from thinking. So along those lines, sawing wood, raking leaves, raking pebbles (well that must be Zen!), kneading dough... --TammyMoet (talk) 10:08, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
How about some sort of 'colouring-in' activity. Set up some pretty repeating geometric patterns (like you certainly used to be able to get books of) made just from black lines on a white background. Have virtual 'paintpots' in a few colours and effectively give them a fill tool only. So you can quickly and easily fill each little shape with the colour of your choice and create any design you want. The books used to keep me quiet for a while when I was little; I bet they'd have worked for longer if I didn't have to try to be neat :) 79.66.105.133 (talk) 11:57, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Herding sheep maybe. Draw a fence and have sheep hop over it at random intervals. The user can click to the left of, the right of or behind the sheep to move a sheepdog into position the dog will then issue a "woof" the sheep will either hop across the fence or evade the dog. Put in a limit that no more than 2 sheep at a time get out, otherwise it won't be relaxing. After a couple of successful herdings you can let the herd snooze for a couple of seconds. (With happy zzz in clouds floating off. 76.97.245.5 (talk) 15:05, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I find 3D Logic to be rather relaxing. In general, I'd say anything without a timer/timed actions can be relaxing. I should probably add that any frustration should be kept to a minimum as well. -- 74.137.108.115 (talk) 22:53, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah - that's an interesting game - it's a bit easy and way too short though. Just 30 levels and most of them you can do in 30 seconds. I got stuck on a couple...but once you get into the swing of it, most levels were easy. SteveBaker (talk) 06:15, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hmmm - I like the idea of the Zen garden - but it might be a bit lacking in activity...which is perhaps the reason it's relaxing. Maybe I should think in terms of gardening in general. SteveBaker (talk) 06:15, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

One of my favourite pass-the-time websites is this falling sand game. I (and my six-year-old) find it quite distracting, but there's a quite a lot of room for improvement if someone wanted to invest the time in it. Being able to mix things, make compounds, have stuff burn at different temperatures/colours, etc. are all possibilities. The neat thing about something like this (where people just play with stuff by making them interact) is that you can make it as complicated as you wish and add more when you feel the need. Matt Deres (talk) 01:17, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

January 25

Opposite of a Smile

Is there a real term for: "a sad face" (ie: smile, frown, scowl etc)? the closest I can think of is a frown, but that always strikes me as a slightly angry face, I'm want a term for a sad face please. Thankyou everyone 92.236.88.188 (talk) 00:53, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have never thought of a frown as angry. Only sad. Although, the second definition at dictionary.com disagrees with me. Dismas|(talk) 01:01, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Acording to "our" article on it can either be sad or angry (intresting that we both think of it so diffrently though), but is there a term that can only refer to a sad face? 92.236.88.188 (talk) 01:04, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Frown is often used as the opposite of smile, and I can't think of anything else that is. I, too, would normally consider a frown to be an angry expression (or a confused one), rather than sad, though. Sadness is usually expressed with the eyes, rather than the mouth (although a quivering lip is quite distinctive). The mouth being curved downwards like in a stylised "sad face" doesn't seem to actually happen in reality. I think the key part of a frown is the furrowed brow. --Tango (talk) 01:06, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Tango, thats a nice answer. ;) 92.236.88.188 (talk) 01:14, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The messy part is that while I think we all agree that a 'frown' refers to a depression of the eyebrows - everyone sees the :-( emoticon as a sad face. So that's clearly just a mouth thing. But if you push eyebrows UP and turn mouth DOWN - you get puzzlement - so a mere downturned mouth doesn't make 'sadness' by itself. Weird. SteveBaker (talk) 01:52, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Wait, are you saying <:-( means puzzlement to you? (The font may not accurately show the face I mean). To me, it looks worried in an upset way, while <:-) (this would all be so much clearer if the eyebrows were separate). These emoticons really aren't showing what I mean, hang on. This image shows a bit more what I mean. Are you saying the far-right top image looks puzzled to you? 79.66.105.133 (talk) 11:44, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Um, yeah - so I'm the guy with Aspergers...so I should probably quit while I'm ahead! But my interpersonal interaction trainer told me that one way to figure out what someone's expression means is to make the same face yourself - you actually feel a diluted version of the emotion yourself...which is really quite a useful trick if you're a hopeless Aspie. So - force the corners of your mouth down and raise your eyebrows - how do you feel? Kinda surprised, kinda quizzical...puzzled. Yeah - puzzled. SteveBaker (talk) 02:39, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

They both look like smileys with party hats to me... --124.254.77.148 (talk) 15:37, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hence the second half of the post. 79.66.105.133 (talk) 17:31, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Down in the mouth.--GreenSpigot (talk) 03:58, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yeaaaaaa! Given GreenSpigot the prize! Excellent answer! SteveBaker (talk) 06:51, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I may be old-fashioned but I'd say "looking blue". 76.97.245.5 (talk) 14:47, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A frown is usually made by creasing the eyebrows. Without the eyebrow action, I would call the face a pout. If the mouth is turned downward and the eyebrows upward, I might percieve that as a "hmm, that's interesting/surprising!" or a "*shrug*, I don't know". ~AH1(TCU) 18:16, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah - that's what I thought...interesting/surprised which is "puzzled". SteveBaker (talk) 02:39, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, I think we are describing two different eyebrow movements. Eyebrows fairly straight up - surprised/interested. Eyebrows raised only in the middle, sort of pushed to form an acute angle between the outer end of the eyebrow and a horizontal line below it - worried/sad. 79.66.105.133 (talk) 21:27, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Henohenomoheji? --Milkbreath (talk) 03:23, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Friend -finding/-matching site?

Everyday I am very lonely at my university. On weekdays I see people during classes, but I don't know any of them, so I can't hang out or do homework with them. At night and on weekends there is no place I can go to be around people, and my life kind of just falls apart without company. Does anyone know of a website where I can find individual people, who are students from my university, to hang out with? Failing that, a dating site specifically for students at my university would also be acceptable, as long as it can find people for me to hang out with. Something like Facebook won't work because it would require me to contact random strangers who are probably not specifically looking to hang out and it would be awkward.

P.S. if it helps my university is Ucla. --71.106.183.17 (talk) 06:18, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

UCLA offers services that might help you build confidence and learn skills to help your socialize better. [22] A great way to meet new people us to join a student group. Find one that you have some interest in, and you should find that the people there will likely be very welcoming. There are also campus specific personal ad sites [23] and Match.com has a UCLA specific section. [24] Rockpocket 06:39, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe that's why there are activities to join at universities so people with common interests can hang out. Maybe contact the Student Union. Julia Rossi (talk) 06:44, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I strongly recommend joining one of the many clubs and societies that ALL universities have. Finding a bunch of people with common interests will help. As for facebook requiring you to contact 'random strangers' - that is utterly inevitable. Whoever you end up being good friends with must right now be a random stranger! So to get yourself out of this malaise you WILL have to kick things off by talking to one or more random strangers. The best you can do is to narrow your search to random strangers who you at least have something in common with to spark that first conversation...hence clubs and such. You really only have to make one friend - because one friend leads to more friends. SteveBaker (talk) 06:51, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, UCLA has a remarkably diverse range of student groups. The full list is here. If there isn't a religious/interest/ethnic based group that you feel you would fit in to, then there are plenty of chartable and voluntary groups. I notice a few that aim to mentor young people from the LA area, that would be a good way to meet people and give back to the community. Rockpocket 07:17, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"A stranger's just a friend you haven't met." (Oh! Streetcar) —Tamfang (talk) 16:42, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You could always buy some brand new friends by joining a frat. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.45.233.59 (talk) 07:55, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Do you live in student housing? Do you have a roommate? If so, ask your roommate to go with you to the cafeteria for dinner or drop by one of your neighbors to see if they're heading down for some food. Chances are, they'll see someone they know and introduce you to them. Or just drop by your neighbor's dorm room and ask them to go toss a frisbee around with you. It's probably warm enough in LA to do this. If they say no, you've at least broken the ice for later attempts. Also, you take classes, right? Do you walk from those classes to your next class/home/etc? Well, strike up a conversation with someone who is walking the same direction. Something like "What did you think of that test?" or "Did you get the homework assignment? I forgot to write it down." Dismas|(talk) 17:05, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Many of you are recommending that the OP join real-life clubs and basically get off the Internet. However, I believe the anon is a person after my own heart and finds it much more comfortable/non-threatening to break the ice online and start a correspondence before befriending someone in person. Here are the websites I recommend to lonely souls....
I've met people who turned out to be very close friends on Meetup.com, where you can find others who share your interests (you're very lucky, in some ways, you're in a big city!). You could also find a large assortment of cool people your age on meetme.hotornot.com, which is one of the cheapest/funnest (albeit largely braindead) dating sites in existence (unless you count utterly filthy free-for-all venues such as craigslist, which I would not recommend in good conscience). I would not discount Facebook either--I understand your reservations/shyness about approaching random strangers, but the few times I've tried it, I've had surprising success and have made at least one good friend that way; just search for someone who likes the same movies/music as you--that usually works well. The real-life Fat Man is one of the shyest, most misanthropic characters you will ever meet and understands your loneliness; that being said, he believes it's not particularly difficult to make friends online. Just try to find a few flattering pictures of yourself and write to others in a way that sounds genuine/kind. Let me know how it goes.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 17:07, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Do these sites cost money? Or are they free? --71.106.183.17 (talk) 20:20, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your life sounds a lot like mine. I'm going to university a long way from home, and I have acquaintances that I see in class but nobody I really hang out with, so I generally end up going to meals alone and spending my evenings and weekends alone in my room doing homework. So, speaking as someone who knows exactly where you're coming from... Don't shun Facebook. You don't have to add "random strangers," you can start by adding the people you mentioned you see in class, and if you're shy like me, it's a lot easier to say, as Dismas suggested above, something like, "What did you think of that test?" over the internet than in person. One time, I asked someone over Facebook if she wanted to trade notes to help study for an upcoming test, and I ended up getting invited to a real-life study group with her.
As some people have suggested, joining clubs can be a way to meet people, but again, if you're shy like me, that can be kind of intimidating, especially if everyone in the club already knows each other and you're the "new kid." So join a club that's likely to have people you already kind of know. For instance, I'm a political science student and I know a lot of other political science students, so I joined the Model UN club. Way less intimidating than joining, say, the Frisbee team, where I wouldn't know anyone at all. Cherry Red Toenails (talk) 21:43, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm in a very similar situation - I'm in the 4th year of my degree and most of my friends were doing 3 year degrees, so they've all graduated leaving me behind. I certainly second the suggestion of joining societies - I'm a member of the poker society, which is great for new people because you don't need to know anyone, just turn up and join in the game, you're automatically included and you can gradually get to know people. If you don't like poker, any society built around a game will work just as well. --Tango (talk) 03:32, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Join the Ballroom Dance Club, if it's still around. Tell James and Cynthia I said hi. --Trovatore (talk) 02:47, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What is the taste of unadulterated, unsalted umami?

I love the taste of umami/glutamate but have noticed the most "savory" foods are also the most salty. In my mind, the purest, most umami-heavy foods are condiments like soy sauce and Marmite--both of which are some of the saltiest substances known to man. So my question, is there a way to experience "pure" umami taste without the salt? Or are the two tastes intrinsically linked such that you need the saltiness to bring out the perception of umami? This might even be a chemistry question. Please advise. --The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 16:50, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't done that for many years, but I think it was very salty. Explanations?--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 17:22, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Not wanting to be glib, but I really do think this is addressed in the article. Umami is the taste of meatiness; mushrooms and steak, for example, are quite capable of tasting meaty without tasting salty. However, the article does point out that umami is intensified by various aromas, such as garlic. This may have some relevance. Overall, I think you're just finding that people like the combination. 79.66.105.133 (talk) 17:28, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I know what you're saying, but mushrooms and steak are complex foods with a number of other earthy/cow-y/fungal flavors in addition to their umami. Many foods taste savory, but I'm trying to understand what pure savoriness tastes like; the trouble is I can't seem to separate this sensation from salt itself.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 17:32, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I don't find much/any sweet, sour, bitter or salty taste in boiled mushrooms, so the only flavour other than umami (as far as I can tell) is aromatic. Eat mushrooms while holding your nose :P 79.66.105.133 (talk) 19:10, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Umami receptors are keyed to detecting amino acids; which are present in proteins. That is why protein heavy foods, like meats, tend to activate your umami receptors. Other tastes are sweet, which is keyed to detecting simple carbohydrates, salty, which is keyed to detecting ionic substances, especially sodium and potassium, sour, which is keyed to detecting acids, and bitter, which is keyed to detecting bases. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 05:24, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Betting/probability over infinite trials proof

A game exists where you start with one coin and then a certain number of trials take place. A trial consists of a coin being flipped, and if heads, you get one additional coin, and if tails, you lose one coin. E.g. after the first trial you have either 0 or 2 coins. When you have 0 coins, you can no longer play. Prove that if the number of trials is infinite, the probability of you having 0 coins is equal to 1. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.241.6.195 (talk) 20:59, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is this a HW question? The blurb at the top of this page says that "if your question is homework, show that you have attempted an answer first, and we will try to help you past the stuck point. If you don't show an effort, you probably won't get help. The reference desk will not do your homework for you." - Jarry1250 (t, c) 21:02, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This isn't homework.
Why on Earth are you asking an artificial probability question requiring the construction of a proof if this isn't homework? Seriously, if you don't know how to start or are stuck just explain your situation and we'll help, but nobody is going to write you out a proof to copy. 79.66.105.133 (talk) 21:08, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This stuff is interesting to me, that's why.
OP's comments refactored. --Tagishsimon (talk) 21:18, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So is anyone actually going to answer? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.241.6.195 (talk) 21:21, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe yes, maybe no. "It may take several days", according to the rubric at the top of the page. --Tagishsimon (talk) 21:28, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Your "game" is a variation of the Drunkard's Walk problem. (And watch the potty-mouth.) B00P (talk) 21:31, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm certainly not going to answer, except to say that abusing people is a poor way to secure their help. Algebraist 21:35, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It should be noted for newcomers that the 'refactoring' involved removing unpleasant and abusive language used by the OP - hence the above comments. 79.66.105.133 (talk) 22:46, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For what it's worth, I think the refactoring should have left the majority of the OP's words, and simply (but unambiguously) hidden the objectionable ones. After reading the OP's (uncensored) responses, I have absolutely no interest in providing an answer. -- 74.137.108.115 (talk) 23:19, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Are you going to answer?

"No were mad lolz"
kthnx —Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.241.6.195 (talk) 23:52, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Just work it out for n trials and take the limit as n tends to infinity. --Tango (talk) 02:01, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Or, in graphical form, plot the chance of having zero coins after 1-9 flips, then draw two curves, one through the even number of flips, and one through the odd numbers of flips. You can add more data points, if needed, to determine that the odd number curve is asymptotic to 1. StuRat (talk) 02:30, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry - but there is no way to avoid the conclusion that this is homework. I won't answer except to use our standard disclaimer:
Please do your own homework.
Welcome to the Wikipedia Reference Desk. Your question appears to be a homework question. I apologize if this is a misinterpretation, but it is our aim here not to do people's homework for them, but to merely aid them in doing it themselves. Letting someone else do your homework does not help you learn nearly as much as doing it yourself. Please attempt to solve the problem or answer the question yourself first. If you need help with a specific part of your homework, feel free to tell us where you are stuck and ask for help. If you need help grasping the concept of a problem, by all means let us know.

SteveBaker (talk) 02:26, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

lol @ stevebaker. lololol. it's not homework.
This question belongs on the Math Desk. StuRat (talk) 02:30, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
. . . only if it accompanies proof that it was attempted first. Zain Ebrahim (talk) 09:42, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
lol @ Zain Ebrahim111111. lololol. it's not homework.
But even if it is homework, I'd still like to see it on the proper desk. StuRat (talk) 21:24, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think it can be proven by the theory that, even though you may keep on getting heads and the number of coins repeatedly increasing, it must eventually start going down because it goes on forever. I don't know, though. My brain is tired. Tezkag72 03:57, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The Drunkard's Walk article linked above explains it. If you keep flipping, you will almost surely reach every score an infinite number of times. But if you ever reach zero (a possible score therefore one you will reach.), then you lose. AlmostReadytoFly (talk) 11:18, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

drivers licencing and laws

Hi, I would like to know if there are any countries in the world that have passed a law that all drivers with existing drivers licences have to be re tested every 5 years, and is it the law in New Zealand that you must indicate before turning or is it just common curtesey ? and if it is the law when was this law passed in New Zealand ? Thank you so much for your help with this matter. Yours Sincerely Elizabeth Plowman —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ellacam (talkcontribs) 21:42, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry Elizabeth, but we don't answer legal questions here. I don't know whether this policy is the law or whether it is common curtesey, and if it is the law, when this law was passed on the Wikipedia. Not being an international lawyer specializing in drivers license renewal, I'm afraid the answer to the first part of your query is also beyond me. However the range of knowledge here is incredible so I will leave this up. Phil_burnstein (talk) 00:12, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure I'd classify this as a legal question. It's a question about laws, but not the sort you'd need a lawyer for - it's not "can I sue New Zealand for this" but "I heard about this thing in New Zealand - is it true?" -mattbuck (Talk) 13:50, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We can, however, direct you to resources where you may find the answers to factual questions. For example, the New Zealand Road Code says "You must signal for at least three seconds before you... turn left or right" [25] The current legislation that proscribes this is Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004, Pursuant to the Land Transport Act 1998. See Section 3.10 Rockpocket 07:18, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

January 26

college baseball lines?

Hi, does anyone know of any sports books that offer college baseball lines? For example.

Run Line-Ohio State(-2 1/2) versus Ohio(+2 1/2) Moneyline-Ohio State(-250) versus Ohio(+210) Total- Over 9 versus Under 9

What about college hockey lines? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.88.16.237 (talk) 00:47, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The run line is a spread bet line. If you see "Ohio +2 1/2", and you bet that, it means that you add 2 1/2 runs to Ohio's score and if they still win, and you bet on them, you win 2x your bet (like, if you bet $100, you'd get your stake and an extra $100). If you bet on Ohio Stare -2 1/2, it means you SUBTRACT 2 1/2 runs from the score for Ohio State, and if they win still, you win your bet. The Moneyline is an "odds" style bet, put in terms of cash. In this case, if you put $250 down on Ohio State, you stand to win $210 extra if they win the game (straight up win, no spread). On the flip side, if you put $210 down on Ohio to win, you stand to win $250 if they do actually win. The actual payout is adjusted accordingly if you bet a different amount. Both bets tell you that Ohio State is favored to win, since in the first case, you are counting on them winning by MORE than the 2 1/2 runs; and in the second case you stand to win more money by betting on Ohio than on Ohio State... The third line is the Over/Under; in this case what you are betting on is the total runs scored by BOTH teams. If you take the over, you are betting that the sum total of runs scored in the game will be greater than 9 (regardless of who wins). The under, of course, is a bet that the score will add up to less than this. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 05:17, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Uuh...that's not what 76 is asking. Clarityfiend (talk) 07:44, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Then could you or someone explain it. I, for one, have no idea what the answer meant, much less, the question itself! Dismas|(talk) 08:03, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The question is essentially asking if it is possible to bet on college baseball and hockey; I'm sure it must be, since if something can be gambled upon, someone is gambling upon it somewhere. Jayron just explained what all the numbers mean, which is not what the question asked, but helpful for the rest of us I suppose. Adam Bishop (talk) 08:11, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
He's asking for sportsbooks, i.e. places to place sports bets (I'm guessing websites like Ladbrokes since he presumably can't get to Las Vegas). Clarityfiend (talk) 10:21, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Alternatively, he may just be after the actual numbers for various games (an amateur bookie perhaps?). Clarityfiend (talk) 11:54, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
AH! I'm sorry. I thought the OP was asking WHAT the lines meant on a college baseball book. I didn't know he was LOOKING for a sports book. I imagine there's several websites that would be helpful in that regard. See this DMOZ link which is cited in our article on sports betting. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 18:36, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Smoking Alternative?????????

Many of my friends have been explaining to me the joys of these 'electric cigerettes'. im sure you've seen them . i just want to know are they legal, but most importantly are they safe?? Compared to normal cigs that is? Cheers JP —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.203.65.40 (talk) 01:26, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Our article on the Electronic cigarette answers those questions. They are typically legal or unregulated in most places (with the exception of Australia). Last year, the World Health Organization said: "no rigorous, peer-reviewed studies have been conducted showing that the electronic cigarette is a safe and effective nicotine replacement therapy." They may be safer than regular cigarettes, but that doesn't make them safe. Rockpocket 02:03, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please help me with my dilema

I got so drunk on New Year’s Eve I ended up sleeping with my boyfriend’s brother, i’ve been with my boyfriend, who’s 20 (i'm 19) for just over a year but things have been a bit strained between us recently and we had a huge argument during the day on New Year’s Eve. I told him I was going back to my ex and he said he didn’t love me anyway and had stopped fancying me ages ago. I was really hurt.

It was awkward because I was spending the day round his house and staying the night. In the evening his brother, who’s 25, suggested we all go down the pub - I jumped at the chance because I just wanted to get out of the house. No one else knew about the argument with my boyfriend but the atmosphere between us was terrible.

We all went down the pub, my boyfriend as well. I had drink after drink. Just before 10.30 my boyfriend suggested we all go to a club -his sister was keen but i wasn’t so he and his sister went off leaving me with his brother. We stayed in the pub until chucking out time. We walked home and there was a note from his parents saying they’d gone round to friends so not to expect them home till very late.

We sat and chatted. He was as drunk as I was and we carried on drinking. He got a bit amorous and I was so drunk I just went with the flow. We got completely carried away and ended up naked on the sofa making love - I can’t say it was mad or passionate, I just don’t remember much about it or how careful we were –I don’t think we used any protection. What I do remember is stumbling upstairs half-naked and falling into bed.

New Year’s Day was hell - my boyfriend knew something was wrong but just thought I was hung-over(which I was) That night he told me he regretted what he’d said and that he still loves and fancies me - What can I do?

There’s a chance I could be pregnant with his brother’s baby – or have caught something from him, since he’s a real ladies man. How can I ever tell my boyfriend what happened and expect him still to care for me?

Please help - I'm going out my mind Grebcheck (talk) 16:32, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On your second-to-last paragraph, you should get a home pregnancy test from Boots and go to the doctor to get yourself checked out for STDs. As for the rest, unfortunately we're not an advice forum and you probably shouldn't be taking the advice of a bunch of random strangers on the internet. You should talk to your friends about this. Good luck. --Richardrj talk email 16:55, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You might want to try the Samaritans (charity) - you can email or phone them, and they will listen unendingly, and refer you to practical help if you want it. Good luck! BrainyBabe (talk) 17:06, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If you're worried about pregnancy or a sexually transmitted infection, see a doctor. That'd be the responsible thing to do.
Apart from that, you either tell him or you don't, and he'll either find out on his own or he won't. We don't know your boyfriend or the particulars; we have no way of knowing how he'd react. Is there anything to be gained from telling him? Would he be better off knowing that you had sex with his brother? It's easy to start assigning blame here: you shouldn't have slept with your boyfriend's brother, his brother shouldn't have slept with you, your boyfriend shouldn't expect that you're going to stick around if he tells you he doesn't love you, and he shouldn't be so stupid as to say something like that if he doesn't mean it. That's just for starters. Frankly, there was a lot of stupidity to go around between the three of you that evening, but maybe you're smart enough to keep your mouth shut, and so is his brother, and you two make a concentrated effort to not let your own stupidity mess him up as well, and your boyfriend is worth the effort this will require and the guilt it will cause, and you learn to live with it. Or maybe you'll make a tearful confession and convince him that this was just an aberration, a weird one-time thing that will never happen again, and because he's basically a smart guy with a healthy sense of self-esteem, who understands that in this life, shit happens and it's not the end of the world, he forgives you. I don't know, I can't see the future.
In the end, though, it's a relationship, not a deposition: you're not obliged to provide full disclosure, and he's not entitled to it; it's all right to feel guilt, but frankly, if he told you that he doesn't love you and want you, he can't expect you to stay committed to you. (Which is not to say that he doesn't do so anyway, of course; he'd be wrong, but that may not be much of a comfort.) In any case, if you don't want something like this to happen again, you need to control your impulses, and you and your boyfriend need to improve your communication. Otherwise you'll just end up in the same position all over again. -- Captain Disdain (talk) 17:22, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'd say you've likely permanently poisoned your relationship and you should break up with your b/f. If not, say you keep quiet, get married, have kids, then some day he finds out about all this. Somebody could end up dead or you could end up a single Mom. Walking away now is the best way to prevent this type of thing, and use more sense with your next b/f. StuRat (talk) 17:59, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
These statistics might inform your decision Men are better at detecting infidelities Dmcq (talk) 18:16, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ask yourself how this could have happened. Were you so drunk you had absolutely no idea what you were doing (in which case, your boyfriend's brother has some explaining to do, because if he was that drunk as well he probably wouldn't have been up to much)? If not, why did you let it happen? I notice you talk repeatedly about whether or not your boyfriend loves you, you never once mentioned whether or not you love your boyfriend. I think you need to give some careful thought about whether you actually want to be with your boyfriend. --Tango (talk) 18:21, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There is always the option of becoming a nun.--Artjo (talk) 20:42, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There is, but unless you seriously want to devote your life to religion in that way, it probably won't work out very well. --Tango (talk) 23:48, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Although others have fictionally done this before you, apparently. Julia Rossi (talk) 07:33, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sub-Prime Mortgages and other disappearing tricks?

Every day we are bombarded with stories of collapsing banks and financial institutions. We are told of rapidly increasing unemployment and store-closures. Here in Britain we are now "officially" in recession with incessant talk of it getting worse, possibly until 2012 or so. But all of that leaves me totally confused when trying to discover the root cause. So the US Banks loaned money to people without evidence being required that the borrowers could pay their loans back; and those risky mortgages were bundled up with good mortgage risks and sold on to banks all around the world and now we are told those bundles are "toxic" and no-one can say how big the debt mountain really is. And public confidence in Banks has now disappeared. But surely, merely blaming sub-prime mortgages for economies around the globe collapsing is a bit exaggerated? I mean, do I have to believe that so many people in the USA have actually defaulted on their mortgage repayments? If so, they would have to be in their tens of millions. Is that really the case, or is this just a cover-up for some major international fraud on a gargantuan scale?Can some clever Wikipedian please explain in simple terms how we all got into this mess in the first place before I take to drink? Thanks in anticipation. But I think i'll have a drink anyway. 92.22.161.201 (talk) 20:31, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Although the term sub-prime is probably overused, what really this crises boils down to is the banks lent out to much money compared to the money they actually had in assets - they started to lend against the money they expected to come back from the other loans. That stated the downward spiral; the rest was simply history repeating itself. Also, it's not really possible to overstate the effect of a lack of confidence in banks. - Jarry1250 (t, c) 20:38, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You yourself exaggerated when you refer to "economies around the globe collapsing". No economies are collapsing, they are merely undergoing an adjustment/recession. We've had them before, and it's not the end of the world. StuRat (talk) 21:22, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Iceland's economy isn't far off total collapse, as I understand it. The rest of the world is just looking at a run-of-the-mill recession, though, you're right. --Tango (talk) 23:45, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sub-prime mortgages was the trigger, but as with any major event it takes a lot of things to be just right for that trigger to start a domino effect with massive consequences. In this case, it's mostly to do with far too many people and companies around the world being far too dependant on borrowed money. If we weren't so dependant on debt, the banks stopping lending wouldn't have been such a bit problem. --Tango (talk) 23:45, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well I have my own pet theory having looked back over last year's news headlines and I think it was Oil speculators wot did it. Sure, people and banks were playing a crazy wealth creation game by seeing homes as investments instead of as homes. Everyone wanted to buy to let. Everyone wanted to borrow 125% of the "value" of the home they were going to buy, and others wanted to cash in part of their so-called "equity". And then oil goes up to $145 a barrel - not because the Oil sheiks put their prices up - oh no - it was Wall Street and London Stock Brokers who were driving up oil prices. And that caused gas and electricity prices to rise. And that pushed up commodity consumer prices. And the camel's back broke and the home mortgagees just gave up on their homes and loans - and the chickens came home to roost. Yes, it was greedy oil speculators and short-sellers on zillion dollar and sterling bonuses methinks. Without them, things would have carried on as before.

Bastards!!! 92.10.84.247 (talk) 03:09, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There's some interesting discussion about this subject in the newsgroup uk.diy. Google has a cache of a particularly relevant thread here. If you're just skimming (it's quite big) start with posts by "M Holmes", who in my opinion knows what he's talking about. 93.97.184.230 (talk) 08:53, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Short version: During the 1990s, the Clinton Administration put heavy pressure on banks to lend to minorities who would not otherwise have qualified for loans, with the "politically correct" goal of closing gaps in home ownership and claiming increased minority ownership, a claim continued by the Bush administration. Surely there have been historical inequities and other genuine reasons why minorities on the whole have lesser incomes and credit histories than majorities, but those gaps should have been rectified by additional educational, job training, and financial management training opportunities, not by banks making unsound loans. So the sub-prime market was invented. This incremental demand started to push up prices (see "law of supply and demand"), which became a self-propelled spiral upward -- investors and homeowners began to jump on the bandwagon of rising prices, pushing the spiral up further, until you saw cases where families were devoting 75% of their take-home pay to housing, or buying homes they couldn't afford with "teaser" introductory-rate mortgages, certain that they could resell at a profit and/or refinance when the introductory period ran out. Eventually, you run out of people to sell to (known as the "greater fool" or "last fool" theory -- the last fools in lose), and the bubble bursts. See the Dutch Tulip Bulb craze of around the late 1600s (from memory, without looking). All speculative bubbles follow the same pattern. But the igniter was the creation of sub-prime loans for political means and vote-grabbing. As usual, when decisions are made for political reasons rather than sound economic reasons, we all pay a high price. Unimaginative Username (talk) 09:11, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There is an article on Government policies and the subprime mortgage crisis. AlmostReadytoFly (talk) 11:23, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Whether or not homeowners have actually defaulted on their sub-prime mortgage is irrelevant. The financial institutions have been passing the risk around for many years. Unfortunately, when more than one institution turns round and says they don't like this level of risk, the other institutions soon get nervous and start refusing to buy the debts. The stockmarket gets wind of this, particularly if banks post gloomier than expected figures with the SEC, and the stock price drops. Soon all the other stockbrokers get nervous and sell their bank stock while they can, the stock price plummets and soon everyone is selling everything. The only ones rubbing their hands with glee are those with extensive short positions. It is unfortunate that the stockmarket can plunge so rapidly on little more than a rumour, but a large part of the business is about managing risk. Astronaut (talk) 14:18, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is there such a thing as INSTANT web surfing?

I'm not satisfied with DSL and thier ilk. Some pages still take time! I'm looking for a service with not one millisecond of delay. A no bullshit you punch in a web page with kazillion megabyte clip/song streaming/downloads, and it loads now!Zorba'sChosenOne (talk) 20:58, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No. Some pages will always be slow. APL (talk) 21:04, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
More clearly, the speed of the "last mile" from your ISP to your house is only one part of the equation. You also need to consider the speed of all the links in the chain from your house, to the server. (It may be in Hong Kong, for all you know!) There may be congestion issues at any step in this process. Furthermore the web server itself may simply be running slowly. Many modern web-sites require a lot of database work to generate a web-site. If the site becomes popular the server may simply not have the power needed to generate the pages in a timely fashion.
In short, With enough money, you can control the speed of your connection, but you can't control the speed of what it connects to. APL (talk) 21:08, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
AKA all computers wait at the same speed. --Trovatore (talk) 02:22, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
While, theoretically, you could get a connection with infinite bandwidth, zero latency is impossible due to the speed of light being finite, so instant loading is impossible. --Tango (talk) 23:40, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This Q belongs on the Computer Desk. StuRat (talk) 02:14, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Not really, it's not a computer problem. It's basic physics. SteveBaker (talk) 02:31, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The two things that screw you are (a) the speed of light and (b) you can't improve the rest of the Internet. Even science fiction technology in your PC and from your ISP won't affect either of those things. A millisecond is about 300 kilometers. The Internet protocols require at least one round-trip - even with NOTHING taking time if the web site you want is 150 kilometers away (not "as the crow flies") - then you're doomed. But for a computer to turn around an internet request in under a millisecond is quite a challenge - and you have ZERO chance if the page you happen to want is not in RAM cache...and the performance of that server is out of your control. Then, if you are contacting the web site for the first time, you have to fight your way through a cascade of DNS boxes - which will add lots more inside-computer time and lots LOTS more speed-of-light distance. If someone else happens to want to access the same server at the same time, you'll probably get 'NAK' packets (Negative acknowledgement) - the Ethernet standard REQUIRES a multi-millisecond backoff-retry under those circumstances. Also - even if that page could conceivably refreshes in 1ms - your CPU will take many milliseconds to send the pixels at the graphics card - and the graphics card will take around 16ms to fling them at the display. So, "No"...as in "Hell No". SteveBaker (talk) 02:31, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How do I destroy my short term memory?

I'm talkin the last 20 years or so. I want to live in the past! How do I destroy all incoming memories? I'm prepared to buy my childhood home then proceed with your advice.THE WORLD'S MOST CURIOUS MAN (talk) 22:14, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"The last 20 years or so" isn't "short term". But just the same, appropriate brain damage will do the trick. Alternatively, they do say that when you're dying, your life flashes before your eyes. Both of these approaches would require you to knowingly do something pretty foolish, but it's starting to look more and more like it wouldn't be all that out of the ordinary for you. -- Captain Disdain (talk) 22:46, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Actually you might want to get dementia. An alternative way can be done by going to the hospital and asking the doctor to do something with your brain. If you die, I guess that's just bad luck but it is all worth it with the (rather low) chance of a successful result. --PST 23:07, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Whatever about your memories you would still live in the present. And that present might not be very nice if you are unable to look after yourself. Dmcq (talk) 00:10, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Short-term memory is minutes - not hours, days, years or decades. So you're talking about selectively erasing long term memory - and I seriously doubt that's remotely possible. We don't remember discrete time-lines - we associate one memory with another to form chains and webs of data. Old memories fade to make room for new ones. There is literally no concievable way to disentangle them. It would be like taking the milk out of your coffee. SteveBaker (talk) 01:26, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Retrograde amnesia does tend to affect recent memories more than older memories, as I understand it (although maybe only on the scale of hours, rather than decades - outside of TV anyway). This is apparently called "Ribot's Law". So, perhaps if you hit yourself on the head just hard enough, you could wipe out just the last 20 years! (Probably not, though...) --Tango (talk) 01:49, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
For an excellent fictional take, see Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind. A really wonderful film. Of course this is aesthetic advice; I have never heard of anyone seeing the film and as a consequence forgetting the last twenty years. --Trovatore (talk) 02:39, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I believe long-term recreational drug use would work, though which drugs I don't know. -mattbuck (Talk) 02:43, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Amnesia isn't an erasure of memory though - that's CLEARLY the case because the memories gradually "come back". So they weren't erased, it was just the access mechanisms temporarily shutting down - older memories have more 'access paths' to them so they hang around better. This wouldn't work for our OP because memory would gradually return. There is no conceivable way for a drug to selectively target recent (on the scale of 20 year) memories either. The bottom line is that memory simply isn't stored that way...so selective erasure is quite utterly impossible...like I said - it's like unmixing the milk from your coffee. The laws of thermodynamics don't allow it. SteveBaker (talk) 02:59, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
@ poster, I've got a feeling, you've managed this already. ;) Julia Rossi (talk) 07:26, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Er...my learned friends, may I draw your attention to the 'giving medical advice' rule. It is an interesting (if preposterous) question but... (and there came a voice crying in the wilderness) Richard Avery (talk) 08:03, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And if it pleases the court, I submit that sous-pont feeding times require an adjournment?... making two voices crying in the wilderness Julia Rossi (talk) 10:19, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Um, what was the question again? --Richardrj talk email 10:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It started with "Um..." Julia Rossi (talk) 10:49, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Considering that we're clearly dealing with fiction here, I'm not too worried. The feeding part is another story. -- Captain Disdain (talk) 12:41, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cyd Charisse

Can anyone recommend websites that have an unlimited amount of high-quality high resolution color Cyd Charisse pictures? Please avoid recommending The Official Cyd Charisse site or Legs - A tribute to Cyd Charisse, I've been there TONS of times. --Crackthewhip775 (talk) 22:45, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why limit yourself to just one site ? Here's the result of a Google search showing many such pics on multiple sites: [26]. Even a Cydophile like you should be satisfied. :-) StuRat (talk) 04:11, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ooh, thanks! --Crackthewhip775 (talk) 04:52, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
But it was Lucille Ball who cracks the whip! Julia Rossi (talk) 07:03, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

January 27

Computer

Question moved to the Computing desk. -- 74.137.108.115 (talk) 04:25, 27 January 2009 (UTC) [reply]

Handgun error on Battlestar Galactica

(Spoiler!)

On the recent episode of Battlestar Galactica, a character who shall not be named committed suicide with a handgun. The character in question put the gun to her head and pulled the trigger. Watching the scene again online, it appears she did not pull back the slide to load a round into the chamber. Can someone just pick up a pistol and pull the trigger? (I doubt it.) --Blue387 (talk) 04:02, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think they want to kill their own actors, especially since blanks fired at point blank range can still be fatal. bibliomaniac15 04:07, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
To better answer your question, it depends on the type of pistol. If it's a revolver, yes, you can just put the bullets in and start shooting. For the type of pistol that you're referring to though, you're correct. You can't just slide in a magazine and start shooting. The first round must be "chambered" by pulling back the slide. Dismas|(talk) 04:54, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
However, nothing prevents firing a pre-chambered round, even if the clip has been removed (as many accidental gunshot victims will attest). Guns should generally not be stored in this state because it *is* possible to "just pick up a pistol and pull the trigger". I haven't seen the video, so I have no idea if this is a possible explanation, but one should never assume that a gun cannot be fired. -- 74.137.108.115 (talk) 06:19, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Quibble: you can load a double-action revolver, pull the trigger and fire; but with an older single-action revolver you need to cock the hammer manually for each shot. (Even with double action it may be easier to cock the hammer with a thumb.) —Tamfang (talk) 06:39, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
(After edit conflict) It's been shown several times that at least some Galactica officers make a habit of keeping a bullet in the chamber of their sidearms.(When loaded.) In any case, the act in question was almost certainly pre-meditated, so even if she didn't normally keep her gun like that, she could have specially prepared it at some earlier time. (We don't see her load it. That would have ruined the impact of the scene.)
Finally, these are fictional weapons, not of Earth manufacture, so really, they work any way the directors and actors want them to work. APL (talk) 06:23, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The gun in my bedroom is loaded and chambered; if I ever need it (fate forbid), I'll want to be able to fire it now! —Tamfang (talk) 06:42, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Exactly, so if Tamfang wanted to kill himself in a dramatic and heart-wrenching scene, he could do so in the most cinematic way possible without having to fiddle with his gun beforehand. APL (talk) 15:25, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hmmm...what I was wondering (from the previous episode) is would a planet still be uninhabitable 2,000 years after a nuclear holocaust? People are living in Hiroshima. A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 13:24, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well, this isn't a Hiroshima-scale event. We're talking, probably within the space of a day, more nukes being detonated than have been in the earth's entire history, even including actions by Xenu. More to the point, Hiroshima was a very small bomb by comparison with what we have today, and thus presumably compared to what the 13th tribe was using. I read somewhere that it would take in the region of 30-40 nukes detonating to cause nuclear winter, and I believe that the US alone has something like 200x that number. I'd certainly think it possible - nuclear material has annoyingly long half-lives. -mattbuck (Talk) 13:42, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Depending on the nature of the attack, particularly dirty bombs could have been used as a radioactive area-denial mechanism. — Lomn 13:47, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

climatic classification by stamp

give me a view of stamp classification of climate —Preceding unsigned comment added by Purnima chowdhury (talkcontribs) 04:48, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Are we to infer that "Stamp" is/was a person? Google returns a few hits for someone named "L. D. Stamp" in relation to climate classification. Dismas|(talk) 04:58, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There is also a Dudley Stamp who classified land usage in the UK and generated detailed maps on the various crops planted. I suspect this information may be relevant in analysing the microclimate in agricultural areas. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 10:24, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The very one who teamed up with S. W. Wooldridge in publications on climate classification. Julia Rossi (talk) 10:43, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Are the Discovery Channel guys nuts?

I was browsing throught the referenced desk as I like to do in my spare time and came across this question and this question. Reading the answers to those questions reminded me of our attitudes to those kinds of questions, so I decided to finally ask. It seems to me that we at Wikipedia are convinced that any "paranormal" phenomena like psychic phonomena, ghosts, UFOs, astrology, out of body experiences have failed scientific verification and are hence false. However I have seen several programs or snippets on the Discovery channel which present these as open questions which are yet to be settled either way. There are programs on UFOs in which sightings are reported to lack explanation, ghost sightings which are presented as "established". Recently I saw a snippet in which an out of body experience of an accident victim was presented as a fact. My question is, if we are right in disbelieving this mumbo jumbo, which according to us has no scientific backing, are the guys at Discovery Channel nuts? Or do they have a vested interest in presenting such misleading programs (increasing viewership)? Please not that my question is based partly on the answers to questions on this refdesk. Thank you -- ReluctantPhilosopher (talk) 11:50, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is about knowledge, the Discovery Channel is about entertainment, therein lies the difference. They are open questions in that they aren't absolutely proven (since that's only possible in mathematics, not science), but there is no significant evidence to support the paranormal. Plenty of things remain unexplained, but the explanation is most likely something mundane that we just haven't worked out yet. --Tango (talk) 11:55, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The purpose of a television program is to try to ensure that you will be watching when the commercial comes on. That's it. Each kind of show has its demographic, and you can sell more Bass-O-Matics to UFO believers than you can to scientists, and there are more of them. --Milkbreath (talk) 12:10, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
How does your theory fit with shows on TV channels that don't show commercials? --Richardrj talk email 12:41, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It doesn't, and it's not a theory. --Milkbreath (talk) 13:48, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
OK, let's call it a point then. It still doesn't fit, so what you should have put is "The purpose of a television program shown on a commercial channel..." That doesn't answer the question in respect of something like the BBC, which does not have the same incentive to increase viewer numbers, yet still shows programmes about the paranormal. --Richardrj talk email 14:09, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
True, an elitist propaganda organ has other incentives: The purpose of a television program is to try to ensure that you're watching when they conjure the mirage of virtual empire and world ombudsmanship. (Pardon me if I don't genuflect before Auntie Beeb.) And we were talking about the Discovery Channel. Don't get me started, or is it too late? --Milkbreath (talk) 14:33, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Your user page says you are American, so how much time have you actually spent watching the BBC? (And I mean the real BBC, BBC America is part of BBC Worldwide, the commercial offshoot of the BBC and operates in the same way as any other commercial channel.) --Tango (talk) 15:02, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I take it back. I apologise unreservedly. It was only my deep envy of the British that made me lash out at the only truly unbiased, unfailingly entertaining and spiritually uplifting television network in the world. Graham Norton is my guru. --Milkbreath (talk) 15:25, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't speak for anyone else who posts at the reference desk, and I don't deputize anyone else to speak for me. If someone asks a question about what I believe to be claptrap (be it the young earth theory or the Myers-Briggs profile), I'll either keep quiet or address the claptrappy side of things. I'm not interested in swaying others to my points of view, unassailable as they are. Similarly, if someone believes the pyramids were dropped into place by extraterrestrials, or that King Arthur's due to return to Britain soon, the scales aren't likely to fall from his eyes even with my invaluable aid. --- OtherDave (talk) 12:29, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You are quite correct. Many of the programs on the Discovery Channel, Science Channel and even the History channel are BS and I just learn to avoid them. I do feel bad for the unsuspecting public, however. A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 13:20, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And if I can say, having only a little experience with such things, that the quality of, say, "research" on some of these "history" shows, irrespective of network, is often quite low. Even public television (PBS, BBC, what have you) feels the need to keep people from changing the channel, and that usually results in quite a bit of "dumbing down" (though it need not necessarily—the real issue is clarity, not intelligence, but clarity is hard, dumbing down is easy). --140.247.241.150 (talk) 17:54, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think I saw another question on a reference desk recently on whether anybody actually believed wrestling matches weren't rigged. Personally I view wrestling matches as more deserving of credibility than these programs. They're entertainment. Dmcq (talk) 16:34, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
WP:RD/H#do some people not know wrestling is fake? Algebraist 17:36, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

College sports

I don't understand why college sports in the USA are so popular with fans? I can understand that a particular college's students, staff, and alumni might be fans of their college football team, but how on earth does that become something with major TV coverage and played in a packed 100,000 seat stadium? By contrast, here in the UK, Oxford and Cambridge universities football clubs play pretty much in obscurity in tiny stadiums. Astronaut (talk) 14:58, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's not quite true of all UK university sport: The Boat Race is a major national event. Algebraist 15:04, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
(ec) The Oxford and Cambridge boat race is pretty popular, though. Still not on the scale of US college football, though, from what I can tell. (I've never understood its popularity, either.) --Tango (talk) 15:05, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The boat race is a bit of an oddity, but it is just once a year. I think the NCAA has entire leagues with months long playing seasons, nationwide TV coverage, and huge stadiums. An American friend told me it was more popular than NFL/MLB/NHL games with their professional players. Astronaut (talk) 15:23, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'd say a good short answer is "years and years of tradition". Consider the NFL: the Super Bowl has existed for just over 40 years. The 1958 NFL Championship game, the "Greatest Game Ever Played", is a scant 50 years past and more-or-less marks the spot where pro football began to compete with college for national attention and status. Prior to that, for well over 50 years, top-notch football was synonymous with college football. Additionally, the NFL has long maintained drafting and scheduling standards that support, rather than compete with, the college game: currently no player can be drafted until he's at least three years removed from high school, and pro games are not played on Saturdays (until the college season has ended). For that matter, the NFL even avoids Friday games to protect the high school tradition.
On the other hand, contrast with baseball. With a hundred and change years of established professional leagues and no significant protection of the college game, NCAA baseball is your Oxford/Cambridge equivalent -- enjoyed by students and faculty but few others, and frequently bereft of the star players who have already turned pro. — Lomn 15:29, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure what is cause and what effect here, but the fact that American universities (unlike British ones) admit some students based on sporting prowess rather than academic merit must be relevant. Algebraist 15:37, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I would imagine the popularity is the cause and the scholarships are the effect (why else would they issue scholarships?), although it is probably a self-reinforcing relationship. --Tango (talk) 15:55, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Years and years of tradition? Your country is barely more than 200 years old, you don't know the meaning of the word "tradition"! ;) --Tango (talk) 15:55, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"In Europe, 100 miles is a long way. In America, 100 years is a long time." --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 16:00, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Jpgordon is more elegant than I am, but I'll point out that the US predates the UK :) — Lomn 16:18, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well, yes, in their present forms. If you go by how far back the respective cultures and histories go (which is more relevant to this discussion), what is now the UK is far far older than what is now the US (although by that measure, the US is a fair bit more than 200 years old, so perhaps I was being a little unfair!). Looking out of my windows I can (barely - it's foggy!) see Durham Cathedral, which is over 900 years old - yes, the name and borders of the country in which it stands have changed many times over that period, but it's the same cathedral. North America doesn't have anything even remotely comparable. --Tango (talk) 16:42, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I fully agree. I spent a semester in England (near Grantham, to be specific) and had the point driven home when I visited one of the local churches. Glancing at the plaques on the walls, I saw one that looked substantially newer, so I figured I'd look at it so as to have a chance at knowing the historical context. Said newer plaque dated to the 18th century -- positively ancient by our national standards. — Lomn 17:07, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A few points to consider. The caliber of play in the top schools of the NCAA, in both American football and Basketball, is excellent. Every year, a large number of players step straight from the universities into the NFL and NBA and more than hold their own. When was the last time a soccer player went from playing for Oxford to starting for a Premier League team ? People like to see the future stars, and in fact top college players are mega stars in their own right.
Second, the college and pro games are slightly different. In pro basketball, the athletes are so good that there is less emphasis on strategy and more on simply letting offensive talent express itself. In the NCAA, there is more variety of talent and more scope for teams using different strategies, making for a more diversified (and many would say more interesting) style of play. Same for football, where the variety of offensive schemes is much wider in the NCAA, with some teams hardly ever passing the ball, and others who barely ever run, and everything in between. Diversity creates interest.
Finally, universities develop followings wider than their base of alumni, be it regional or state-wide (for example, if you live in Nebraska and like football, you will be a fan of the University of Nebraska Cornhuskers, just like a football-mad yougster in the UK will support his local side). Traditionally powerful teams develop even wider fan bases that translate into large television audiences. --Xuxl (talk) 16:08, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The best football players in the UK will join Premier League first teams while still in their teens, so perhaps it's the age restrictions on US pro football that are significant (as was suggested by Lomn). Also, up and coming UK football players usually join the academy of a professional team rather than playing through their school or university. International under-21 (and other age categories) games (played by the young players signed to a pro club) get a decent amount of attention, but domestic ones are rarely noticed by anyone not directly involved. --Tango (talk) 16:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think that is an important parallel between UK football and American baseball where most of the top players don't go to college/university and attendance at the college games is minor. But something must also differ in the sports culture of the countries where for U.S. football and UK football (soccer), the sizes of the stadia differ so much. Professional football in the UK has 4 stadia with over 50,000 capacity while the U.S. has almost 100 pro and college stadia that large (which doesn't scale for the 5x population difference). Average attendance of U.S. college football is very high: "SEC lives up to its reputation as the home of passionate college football fans with a conference-record average of 75,706 fans per game. Big 10 schools averaged just under 70,000 fans per game."[27] Rmhermen (talk) 17:02, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Umm... interesting responses. Comparing the NFL to the English leagues, I noticed the NFL is played between 32 professional teams, with each team playing 16 games in a regular season, plus some playoff games and superbowl if they're lucky; the English leagues are contested between 92 professional teams in 4 divisions, with each team playing at least 38 league games, plus games in other competitions. Perhaps there is a greater opportunity to watch professional sports in England (your local team is quite likely to be a professional team). I also think Xux1 is on to something with the differing development programs, with US college sports being aimed at bringing talented players into professional sports, while English football tends to develop their own promising talent from an early age. It is also interesting that Xux1 mentioned the University of Nebraska - I have a Nebraska Cornhuskers football shirt :-)) It was also interesting coming across this image - not even English Premiership games are that well attended. Astronaut (talk) 17:09, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In fact, it's even more than 92 pro teams - several Conference National teams are full-time professional. The rest are semi-professional, you have to go a long way down the leagues to get to completely amateur teams. --Tango (talk) 17:23, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

FIT

Ok i had heard about florida institute of technology(FIT),melbourne,florida,USA from some of my friends(I'm in international applicant) and applied for it with my SAT-1 marks and today got an email informing me of my admission to the computer engineering course that the university offers.But when i checked up international university ranking,FIT was nowhere on the list ,(US News and World Report and other lists) .So i was wondering whether i should go ahead and accept the admission or not because i can't seem to find any information on whether this institute is any good or not - and i would like to hear from anyone who currently resides in the US or has knowledge regarding the universities there.Vineeth h (talk) 17:28, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You may find Florida Institute of Technology#Rankings (and the rest of that article) useful. --Tango (talk) 17:48, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The driest area of Britain

My wife suffers from terrible arthritis that is made much worse in the damp atmosphere where we live in Scotland. Does anyone here know whereabouts in the UK - probably England -that enjoys the driest and warmest climate? Thanks. 92.20.24.147 (talk) 17:49, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure how dry it is, but Cornwall is probably the warmest. --Tango (talk) 17:51, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]