riddler
-
Content
5,952 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Feedback
0%
Everything posted by riddler
-
Capitalism at it's finest. IIRC, this started as the U.S. government's attempt to get the human genome mapped. The research to do this was costly and time-consuming. The government figured if they would allow researchers/universities/et al to patent the genes, it would inspire them to map the human genome at their own cost, rather than waiting for government research grants. I inferred that the researchers that own the patents get a portion of the proceeds from any gene therapies when they come later, but that was just a guess. Also, I think my source of this information was a television show, like 20/20, so I don't know if it's true or not. http://www.ornl.gov/sci/techresources/Human_Genome/elsi/patents.shtml Although most of that page is about how patents allow sharing of information, while still protecting the investment of the researchers. It's all about money. Edit to add - I doubt very much that international patents will apply. Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD
-
What I originally said was Nitrous is an oxidizer, and maybe this will settle the discussion: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxidizing_agent Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD
-
Yeah, after looking it up, I see that I am wrong (kinda). I think this qualifies as an oxidizer, though, since it apparently adds oxygen via a chemical reaction. My point was that it was not a combustion explosion - just a tank pressure explosion. Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD
-
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/2009/05/11/vo.ca.plane.engine.trouble.kcal Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD
-
+1. I hear other people say "google it", I say "wiki it". I use the Wiki widget on my iPhone more than the Google one. Information evolves over time and Wiki has a great model for improvement of information. But yeah, people need to know that you need to check the cited sources. I'm always disappointed with the citation pages don't come up. They really need a "cache" feature, like Google's. This article only proves how irresponsible the media is - nothing new to skydivers It doesn't reflect poorly on Wikipedia, IMO, in fact, it demonstrates Wiki's strengths. http://xkcd.com/285/ Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD
-
My grandfather's funeral was a few weeks ago, and my mom does geneology and puts together crop-books. She had a really nice one for my granfather, starting with a geneology tree on the front, followed by pictures of his grandparents, picutres of his parents, and pictures of him, from birth to the nursing home. Your post reminded me of that because my mom pasted a few reciepts into his book that looked like this one. One was for a new Model-T car (something like $1,000), and one was a ledger of his father's showing money that my grandfather sent home to his father from WW2. Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD
-
I've had to take classes in tank filling for SCUBA. I've seen pics of explosions that have taken out most of an entire city block (not these little tanks, but really big ones they use for fill-stations). NO2 isn't really explosive - it acts as an oxidizer to hydrocarbons (i.e. petrol), so this wasn't a combustion reaction. The explosion was entirely due to the pressure in the tank. One compressed scuba tank has enough potential energy to lift a train locomotive 1 foot off the ground - nitrous tanks are usually smaller, but have plenty of stored energy. So the question is why did the tank rupture? It's likely that the user tampered with the burst valve to render it ineffective. But it could have also been a condemned tank, or been structurally compromised by the owner. Lots of possibilities. Usually, there is an investigation by DOT after a tank explosion. Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD
-
Saw it a second time yesterday on IMAX. Spoiler questions below: - Why was Spock's mother (a human) in the Vulcan's Forge with the Vulcan council of elders? That isn't a place that humans (or any ordinary Vulcan) is allowed to go, I thought. - What was it that Chekov said enthusiastically after he was able to get Kirk and Sulu beamed from freefall? It sounded like it might be Russian, but after seeing it twice, I can't understand it. Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD
-
The nice thing about an alternate reality is you can sleep with the Vulcan, instead of the Director Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD
-
More spoilers below. I didn't think of that, but now that you mention it is very obvious, and I agree. Maybe they focused on character building for the "first" movie, and will go into moral dilemmas in later movies. Yeah, and the third time Kirk was hanging by a cliff was probably too much as well. This I saw as a poorly-acted tribute to Shatner. Few people can do the arrogant macho captain like him. But I do think Star Trek is better without him. Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD
-
(spoiler) I think it was really the fault of one pointy-eared Vulcan. But he was doing the best he could under the circumstances. Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD
-
IOWA BASE jumpers have been keeping that location a secret for years Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD
-
Ditto - the (spoiler alert) "alternate universe" or "alternate dimension" or "alternate reality". Whatever it was. It was if the writers said to themselves, "there's really a lot we'd love to put into this movie, but because there is already so much ST media, the plot is too locked-down for us to write anything good. I guess we'll have to go with the time-traveling, temporal-event-changing alternate reality!" I assume that this cast is contracted for the next several movies, so from here forward, the movies will all follow this alternate reality. It's not like I wasn't already confused enough with the completely random stardates. Overall, a really, really excellent movie. Reminiscent of Firefly, with the good CG and abundance of one-liners. A lot of good references to much of TOS, TNG and even Enterprise. Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD
-
They serve you breakfast??? Where do you find those? Mine are usually just all hung-over Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD
-
Survey: Church-goers more likely to support torture
riddler replied to Andy9o8's topic in Speakers Corner
Already did. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sampling_(statistics) Feel free to point out where it says that's a good ratio for public opinion. Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD -
That was 2003 - but I remember listening to a televangelist in the 80s that said homosexuals want to promote homosexuality, and after that, they will be promoting sexual relations with children. I don't remember who it was It may have ben Pat Robertson. I do remember it was on the "700 club". I watched it for entertainment value Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD
-
I can tell you from first-hand experience. This is true. But I can also tell you that parents get competitive about how fast theirs were trained, and many of them exaggerate a bit. My mother for instance, claimed I was completely trained at 11 months, but I didn't walk until 13 months. I'm still trying to figure out how I did that Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD
-
I actually wouldn't have a problem with that, because, again, two consenting adults, and no children involved. It would be a little weird to me, but that's my issue, not theirs. As far as sibling marriage where children are potentially involved, I still think it's a bad idea. When siblings have children, we are reasonably confident that it will cause genetic problems, so we should prevent that. Any other two people might be prone to causing genetic problems by reproducing, but that's the freedom that two people have to choose. We can't test everybody that wants to have kids, just to find the small number of people that will have problems. We can assert that children of related parents are likely to have problems, therefore we can prohibit it. Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD
-
You can't stuff a marshmallow in a piggy-bank Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD
-
I don't support polygamy, but I don't think it should be outlawed either. Two consenting adults, IMO, applies to three or more consenting adults. OTOH, I don't fully understand the reasoning behind the polygamy laws, other than (again) religious values that underscore our laws. Either that, or they really just hated the original Mormons (not the current ones). I can see restricitng blood-marriage because it affects children. Gay marriage allows freedom and equality between two consenting adults, and there is no social drawback, other than offending some religions that started thousands of years ago. And it grosses out many heterosexuals, which is probably the main reason it's controversial. Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD
-
I don't believe it's an either-or situation. Just because wealthy corporations right now benefit from lobbying, and the minority suffer their benefaction; that doesn't mean that if we took that away, that the wealthy corporations and special interest would suffer. Unless you mean that the wealthy corporations would suffer because their CEOs could no longer afford gold-plated Ferraris. If that's the case, then, yes, they would suffer. Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD
-
Lobbyists are a problem if they promote an agenda that benefits the few, at the expense of the majority. For instance, my next-door neighbor is the president of the Colorado Auto Dealer's Association - he is, in fact a lobbyist. His goal is to try to create tax and other incentives for colorado auto dealers that benefit them, but may negatively impact colorado citizens. Or he may do something that's beneficial to both, but what are the chances of that? Right now, he's trying to promote clean, energy-efficient cars. That sounds like a good thing at first, but studies show that in the majority of cases, it's better for the environment to keep your old car and tune it, than to buy a new one (manufacturing, delivery, etc). He will continue to promote the sale of new cars, even if it isn't good for the environment. That's his job. Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD
-
'cause I'm an American that believes in equality. I think there are still a few of us left that care about such things. Even if I'm not trying to marry someone of the same sex, I'm glad a few states have the courage to do the right thing. Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD
-
You're referring to Reagan, right? Man, you must be pretty old Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD
-
And New Hampshire may be next http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/05/06/maine.same.sex.marriage/index.html What kind of crazy topsy-turvy world do we live in when "liberal" California outlaws same-sex marriage, and has some of the most stringent marijuana-usage laws, and "conservative" New Hampshire and Maine are legalizing gay marriage, and both states currently have proposals to decriminalize pot?? Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD