Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2008 October 2

= October 2 =

Geographic jigsaw
All this recent talk of geographic ignorance leads me to ask if there’s such a learning aid as this:


 * An online jigsaw where the pieces are in the shape of countries, major islands etc. There's probably be something like 300 pieces.  The pieces are upsized/downsized so that the areas are all equal, and all the learner has to go on is their shape. The player has to move them around so that they fit together, and a piece immediately assumes its correct size when it's put in the correct spot on the screen.

Anyone know of anything like this? -- JackofOz (talk) 00:10, 2 October 2008 (UTC)


 * No. But the top hit for a google search of "geography quiz" leads to a very useful map website. Darkspots (talk) 00:15, 2 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I had huge flashbacks when you brought this up. This has what you're looking for and more. However, you can't do the entire earth at once; you have to go by continent. Paragon  12321  01:45, 2 October 2008 (UTC)


 * This is a fun place for beginners. hydnjo talk 01:54, 2 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Hey, those are excellent. Exactly what I had in mind, only on a smaller scale.  I went straight to Level 9 in Europe, and it was a lot harder than I expected.  The US states weren't easy either (I had to cheat and use the borders.)  Thanks.  --  JackofOz (talk) 03:03, 2 October 2008 (UTC)


 * The one Paragon mentioned is the one I always use. (Which is why, as was mentioned a few questions up, I CAN, in fact, find the state of Guerrero, as well as every other Mexican state. :) And many other obscure little places. I actually spend a lot of time on that site... I've been told I have way too much time on my hands...) I was excited when I saw this question, thinking, "Boy oh boy, Jack, have I got an answer for you!" And then I saw Paragon beat me to it... Cherry Red Toenails (talk) 03:10, 2 October 2008 (UTC)


 * There's StatetrisAPL (talk) 13:23, 2 October 2008 (UTC)


 * That's cool, too. Tks, APL.  --  JackofOz (talk) 23:01, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Actually, I prefer the quiz over at Lizard Point. The maps.com one is too finicky for such a tiny picture and the handling is weird. This one has lots of quizzes, from continents to major cities to provinces/states. Matt Deres (talk) 19:10, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Abuse contact for Obama supporting teacher
Does anyone know what school district Kathy Sawada (creator of the vid of brainwashed kids singin' 'bout Obama)? Furthermore, does anyone know how to contact them? A district website would be good to know about. GO-PCHS-NJROTC (Messages) 01:05, 2 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Abuse? Please now—don't be hyperbolic. Anyway, she's at the Colburn School of Performing Arts. That took me a whole five seconds to find out via Google. And it really doesn't sound like she "brainwashed" them (their parents were involved)—nor does it sound like it was an official school activity, nor does it sound like there was any pressure to participate. (Judging by the self-description of their activities, anyway.) But hey, believe whatever the right wing blogs tell you to believe—they couldn't possibly be misreporting things for their own political agenda! Might as well fire off a few knee-jerk e-mails, right? Nothing like going bananas over nothing, eh? I mean, in the absence of not knowing for sure, why not just believe the anonymous internet commentators who believe that Obama is a "socialist" (but somehow have managed to avoid calling George W. Bush or John McCain that despite their desire to nationalize certain Wall Street institutions this week). They wouldn't lead you astray, no sir! --98.217.8.46 (talk) 02:32, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
 * By the way, why do I see a padlock icon after the external link in the above passage? —Tamfang (talk) 08:11, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
 * No, it's not really; I really do intend to contact them. Also, if I wanted to spread political propoganda, wouldn't I be trying to do it on the articles about the canidates, which I have never edited? GO-PCHS-NJROTC  (Messages) 12:11, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Here we go again, is it soapbox week on the RefDesks? We aspire to provide factual answers here, not opinions. Asking questions about "brainwashed kids" does not invite a factual answer ( all kids are brainwashed doncha'know - it's called growing up). Political questions and polemical responses are not needed here, so let's just close this thread now. Regards. Franamax (talk) 06:28, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
 * To be fair, the question is potentially a valid question if it wasn't phrased so poorly. Anyway you should be able to find any and all answers to the question at so I don't see any further need to discussion of this matter Nil Einne (talk) 14:19, 2 October 2008 (UTC)


 * GO-PCHS-NJROTC has already indicated his desire that McCain win the election, I doubt this question was anything more than political propaganda.  Little Red Riding Hood  talk  21:36, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
 * No, it's not really, I really do intend to contact them. Also, if it was political propoganda, wouldn't I be trying to say something on the articles about the canidate, which I have never edited? GO-PCHS-NJROTC  (Messages) 12:11, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
 * To further explain, this isn't completely about my desire to see McCain win, but rather my opinion of political bias in public schools, and my opinion of it is that it is highly distasteful and disgraceful, especially at elementary and middle school levels. If it were a teacher encouraging little kids to cheer for McCain, I'd have to say that would be just as uncalled for. Although this is not a soap box, and this here opinional statement may be out of place, this is exactly why editors should not automatically assume another editor's opinion. The reason I used the word "abuse" in the title of this section is because the teacher posted apparently posted that video on the internet (or allowed someone else to do so), and internet misuse / violation of the law or ISP acceptable use policies is commonly known as internet abuse, and the person / department that accepts reports of internet abuse is commonly known as the abuse contact. Being a fighter of spammers / hackers, I'm quite familiar with this terminology; I got into Wikipedia when I caught an email spammer begin to use it as a medium as a matter of fact. Also, I have indeed indicated my support for McCain at reference desk in the past, but for that matter, I saw other people participating in those discussions supporting Obama. The addition of a McCain supporter in such discussion, in my opinion, helps balance things out, and Wikipedia is all about neutral point of view. The last thing we need is for some newbies, or worse yet an under cover spy for a news channel, to either think we're all Democrats or all Republicans just because of one discussion. :) GO-PCHS-NJROTC  (Messages) 02:49, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Headset to hear dictations
Which is the best headset to hear and transcribe dictations even though the audibility is less and can be vaguely understood, ofcourse, with reasonable cost. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.227.88.91 (talk) 02:03, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

commercial ice cream tubs
my roommates and I really love ice cream. Where can we buy ice cream in huge tubs like they have at ice cream shops? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.8.100.72 (talk) 02:32, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
 * You may well be able to order them through your favorite ice cream shop! Or at least they can tell you who their supplier is. --Masamage ♫ 02:40, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Ice cream stores I know would be delighted to sell you tubs of ice cream, especially if you let them know in time to add them to their weekly order from their supplier. They might not want to sell their only tub of a flavor and have other ice cream fans be disappointed. Try to negotiate a low price, rather than paying some "by the pint" or even "by the cone" price. But if you pig out on the tub of ice cream, beware of Brain freeze. (not medical advice). Edison (talk) 04:55, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Baskin and Robbins? Dairy Queen? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.161.215.237 (talk) 02:15, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Geography/Social Studies Question
What do Baltimore, MD and St. Louis, MO have in common that no other U.S. cities have in common? Hint: has to do with location.--69.250.55.119 (talk) 03:35, 2 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Both cities have been located under the same baseball team? (The Baltimore Orioles were once the St. Louis Browns.) TenOfAllTrades(talk) 03:54, 2 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Neither city is part of any county. They are considered "independent cities", and are not counties unto themselves (like Honolulu, Hawaii), nor consolidated city-counties (like Jacksonville, Florida) but are considered outside of any county.  Outside of the state of Virginia (which has dozens of these) this is a rare situation. --Jayron32. talk . contribs  04:00, 2 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Also, both lie on Interstate 70 and U.S. Route 40. --Jayron32. talk . contribs  04:05, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
 * So do Kansas City and Denver. CL — 04:10, 2 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Both are (mostly) surrounded by eponymous counties that they aren't part of. St. Louis borders St. Louis County, Missouri (and Illinois); Baltimore borders Baltimore County, Maryland (and touches Anne Arundel County]]). In both cases, the cities were at one time part of the counties they are named for. —D. Monack talk 05:08, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Or which were named for them? —Tamfang (talk) 08:13, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

need list of what sells the most online...demographics,stats
would like to know where to find demographics or stats of what sells the most online thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by Meanzebra (talk • contribs) 04:41, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Pornography. Franamax (talk) 06:20, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Follow up question: Reference_desk/Miscellaneous
OK, easy, well-paid jobs don't exist. However, what about easy unpleasant well-paid jobs, like perhaps something in the line of truck driver in Iraq, or mining in the Australian desert or working in an oil field somewhere.

Please, don't suggest prostitution. Whether is it easy and mostly nor even well-paid. Mr.K. (talk) 09:43, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't see how you can combine easy and unpleasant. Standing around holding a contruction road sign then. In the oil patch, you'd want to be in the construction / maintenance end of things where there are large bits of time when you wait for a crane and do nothing at all. You could try safety crew in a chemical plant - it pays fairly well, and it's hardly ever unpleasant, except when you're running towards the spill when everyone else is running away. Otherwise you're back to the usual - prostitute, drug-dealer, tobacco-smuggler.
 * Equipment operator in the oil sands at Fort McMurray also springs to mind. That's well-paid. Franamax (talk) 10:14, 2 October 2008 (UTC)


 * With easy I meant easy to get with low-qualifications. Equipment operator in the oil sands seems to be a good example in this direction. BTW, I told you not suggest prostitution. In many parts of the world, it is not considered a job. Mr.K. (talk) 10:22, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Working on an oil rig pays damn well from what I hear and I'd call it pretty unplesant stuck on a metal rig for several months 88.211.96.3 (talk) 10:39, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I understand refuse collection pays comparatively well for what (unless you're the driver) seems a low-skilled job. AlmostReadytoFly (talk) 10:53, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

You had it yourself—working for a U.S. government contractor in Iraq or Afghanistan. You'll make more money if you have military or law-enforcement experience, but no matter what, they need a lot of guys. And if you're a U.S. citizen, the first seventy grand or so of your income is tax-free. Darkspots (talk) 11:31, 2 October 2008 (UTC)


 * The logical follow-up question of the follow-up question is: so, where do I get these kind of jobs? Mr.K. (talk) 12:06, 2 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I would have said Bechtel off the top of my head. When I was talking to someone about this a couple years ago, that was the company they mentioned repeatedly.  So I googled right now and found this.  Not very encouraging, that.  If you're seriously looking for a job, email me and I'll ask my contact what the story is today. Darkspots (talk) 14:29, 2 October 2008 (UTC)


 * There is of course the classic job for the hard-up and untrained. Entry qualifications area minimal, all the training is paid for by the employer, the wages are OK, it gains relatively high respect, although it is (sometimes) unpleasant. I speak, of course, of joining the army. DJ Clayworth (talk) 13:52, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I hear the guy who holds the construction sign gets paid up to $19 an hour, so that could qualify as easy, unpleasant, and well-paid. Useight (talk) 16:00, 2 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Do you define 'easy' to be 'relatively unskilled', or 'no heavy lifting', or both? If you're willing to work in a desolate, miserable location for long hours and doing backbreaking labor, you can do quite well in mining.  Get involved with something like Xstrata's Raglan mine project in northern Quebec: .  An acquaintance of mine did a bit of contract work up there.  Apparently the miners are extremely well-paid, and have (IIRC) two weeks of time off between four-week stints at the mine.  Downside is that there's nothing to do after work, and you're only a few degrees south of the Arctic Circle.  (On the bright side, that means it's easy to save your cash....)  TenOfAllTrades(talk) 16:35, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
 * From what I've heard, there's good money to be made in the housekeeping services that clean up after violent crimes. If you can cope with the psychological difficulty, scrubbing brain matter off of hotel room walls might qualify as 'easy work.' -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 22:35, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I want to go back to the just plain easy part. At least in Canada, start a charity. This stuff is priceless - you establish a charitable foundation with defined aims (whatever, something to do with blind children in Botswana is probably good) and get a tax deduction number. Now you contract with a charitable fund-raising organization to get out there and beat the bushes for money. They do all the work, and take only 70-80% of the money raised. If you've come up with a good story, they'll be able to raise decent money. Now you have funds coming in, which you have to distribute appropriately. Of course, to do it right you can't just give it all away immediately, you have to bank it and investigate the options. And of course, any decent foundation needs to have a managing director to oversee the process - and of course a decent charity has to pay its director appropriately. Nothing too extravagant, let's say $65,000 - $80,000 a year. Also, a book-keeper will be needed, at appropriate wages - let's say it's your wife, at the bargain rate of $30,000 per year. So let's look at the numbers: $500,000/year raised; 350,000 to the tele-fund-raisers; 100,000 to the noble organizers; 50,000 accumulated to do good works. Please think of the children! This is not fantasy at all, it describes a portion of registered charities in Canada. I'm sure they are all doing it for noble motives. What could be more noble than helping others? Franamax (talk) 23:14, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
 * As Brad Paisley would put it, start a band. GO-PCHS-NJROTC  (Messages) 02:56, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Even better yet, go after the Deadliest Catch. Seriously, that would earn you a heck of a lot of money of you can manage risking your life on the Bering Sea for it. But then again, there's a lot of people that couldn't take that kind of stress. GO-PCHS-NJROTC  (Messages) 03:01, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

e mail of naraynamurthy
what is the e mail adress of mr narayana murthy founder of infosys technologys?Ashokumar31 (talk) 10:26, 2 October 2008 (UTC) a k jain


 * It is very unlikely that you would find the e-mail address of someone like Mr Murthy available to the public. If you wish to contact him, you can write him a letter (To: Mr Murthy, Infosys Technologies...), or use his company's contact form to get closer to your goal. &mdash; QuantumEleven 12:04, 2 October 2008 (UTC)


 * At least one one in 10,000 people in India, that is, one hundred thousand Infosys employees, know his email id. Just curious, why you want that? --V4vijayakumar (talk) 15:36, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

No spiders in damp buildings?
I am a chambermaid in a small hotel which has two wings - the North wing has damp walls but the South wing is ok. Every once in a while I have to remove cobwebs from the South wing but no cobwebs develop in the damp North wing. Is this s coincidence? Or can I assume that if I have spiders at home, my home is healthy? Thanks. 84.67.172.148 (talk) 10:38, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Since there are spiders in derelict and condemned buildings, the idea that "spiders indicate a healthy home" is unfounded. &mdash; Lomn 12:57, 2 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Spiders, as i understand it, like warm places, so perhaps that is a factor? 194.221.133.226 (talk) 13:11, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Perhaps there are no prey there so they didn't spin webs or perhaps there are jumping spiders there which don't spin webs.-- Lenticel ( talk ) 01:38, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Spiders indicate a home which is becoming healthy. If you have bugs, you will get spiders. They will stay until the bugs are gone, then the spiders will go away too. I'm no expert, but I'd think damp walls might not be conducive to web-forming spiders, since the damp would eventually creep over the web and reduce its trapping ability - thus favouring jumping spiders per Lenticel. Web-forming spiders will come to eat flying insects, hunting spiders will come for the creepy-crawlies. A "healthy" home will have almost no spiders - if they don't find insects, they don't stick around. Franamax (talk) 23:23, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Yacht
I would like to purchase a yacht, but I dont know anything about them, so, is it possible to get one that will drive it self, eg if I want to sail from the South Africa to Florida, can I just punch in the relative info and ly back drinking beer with bikini clad woman while it steers itself, money is no problem —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.115.175.247 (talk) 14:48, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
 * You mean a yacht. Yeah, yachts can navigate by themselves to a point, but they would need a human to guide them into port.  Plasticup  T / C  14:52, 2 October 2008 (UTC)


 * And how much would one cost, I need one big enough to live on and through parties, how much is the upkeep? Thanks again —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.115.175.247 (talk) 15:18, 2 October 2008 (UTC)


 * If you have to ask how much they cost, then you cant afford one!--GreenSpigot (talk) 15:29, 2 October 2008 (UTC)


 * You dont get rich by spending willy nilly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.115.175.247 (talk) 15:43, 2 October 2008 (UTC)


 * While saying "a yacht will steer itself" is true to some extent, it's a bit like saying "a plane will fly itself" because it has an autopilot. You still need someone competent to be in charge. If you are rich enough to be buying a party yacht you may as well hire a skipper to look after the boat while you party. DJ Clayworth (talk) 15:52, 2 October 2008 (UTC)


 * South Africa to Florida is thousands of miles, it would probably take weeks in a pleasure yacht, that's not a journey you want to take without someone that knows what they're doing. --Tango (talk) 21:54, 2 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Indeed. Driving in a straight line might be simple enough for an autopilot, but doing things like avoiding weather, now, that's something I'd want a live, well trained human to do... --Jayron32. talk . contribs  02:46, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Aircraft autopilots can do many of those things - on a typical 9 hour transatlantic flight, the pilot actually takes the controls for a couple of minutes on takeoff - and for about 10 minutes on approach to the destination airport - and even that can be performed by the autopilot if necessary. SteveBaker (talk) 04:05, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

The other issue is that vessels get tossed around with waves, wind etc, and go off course unless there's someone in charge making sure the vessel stays on course. While you're down the back making whoopee with the bikini chicks (probably bikini-less chicks by this stage), you might find yourself smashing into Brazil, or Cuba, or entering the Bermuda Triangle, never to be seen or heard from again. -- JackofOz (talk) 04:13, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
 * GPS-aided autopilots have no problem avoiding these issues. &mdash; Lomn 13:03, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Are they really that accurate? Assuming a calm sea, if I start out on the western side of South Africa and point my boat at Florida, and then go and read "War and Peace" down in the hold, can I really expect to finish up exactly where I pointed the boat at?  What about the need to avoid other shipping?  --  JackofOz (talk) 00:47, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
 * They're accurate to a few feet usually, sometimes more (depends on how good your equipment is and how paranoid the relevant government(s) is (are)). You wouldn't point your boat in a certain direction and just use the autopilot to keep you going in a straight line, you would input your destination into the autopilot and let it point you in the right direction. --Tango (talk) 15:36, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Still, there's something nice in system redundancy... Having a live human backup is probably a good idea. Autopilot may be able to handle everything, but do you really trust it?  Plus, what if some psycho tries to hook up with your hot wife, traps you in the hull of a sinking ship, and you have to sneak back on board your own boat to kill him with a flare gun.  Hyh?  What will you do then... --Jayron32. talk . contribs  16:12, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Even without the psychos, it would be good to have someone on board that knows how to use a flare gun! Also, if the boat sinks, I doubt the life-raft has an autopilot. --Tango (talk) 16:38, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Shipboard GPS-enabled autopilots would be easily able to navigate an ocean. I have a friend with a sailboat autopilot that can navigate small lakes (well, small as in Lake Ontario), an ocean is the same thing. Of course, in really heavy seas, you wouldn't want your autopilot putting you side-on to the waves trying to get to the programmed destination, so you would still want to have a boat-type-dude onboard. Port entrances could be tricky too, and I'd check the auto-unit to be sure it would sail around islands and reefs that might get in the way - it'd be a bugger if your programmed course included traversing Saint Helena or something equally inconvenient.
 * But mostly I'm commenting on the original mis-spelling. Because of my single-handed efforts, when you zoom in to the NRCan atlas, as here - well, let the email excerpts tell the tale:
 * 11-Sep-07 To: info-atlas@nrcan.gc.ca I am disappointed to note the number of "Yatch" clubs shown, rather than the more accepted "Yacht".
 * 11-Sep-07 From: info-atlas@nrcan.gc.ca I am forwarding your e-mail to the people responsible for the topographic maps.
 * 18-Sep-07 To: info-atlas@nrcan.gc.ca Hey, looks like we have "Yacht" clubs now! Excellent response, many thanks.
 * So it's not just the RefDesk posters who get the spelling wrong, whole government departments do it too! :) Franamax (talk) 23:50, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Vaporware or Snake Oil
Can you name one item which you thought as Vaporware, or Snake Oil first when you heard of it, but truly it is not. --V4vijayakumar (talk) 15:22, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Our list of vaporware includes a (cited!) section on eventually-released products. Individual opinions, though, are generally outside the remit of the Reference Desk. &mdash; Lomn 16:15, 2 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Vaporware is not quite the same thing as snake oil. Vaporware is something that's promoted as if it existed - but does not.  That doesn't mean it's impossible for it to exist - and it's very common for things that were once vaporware becoming "real".  Snake oil is something that is actually being sold that simply doesn't work as advertised - and commonly cannot work as advertised.  Duke Nukem Forever is still vaporware - Hydrogen fuel enhancement for car engines or Homeopathic 'medicine' is snake oil.  It's perfectly possible that Duke will finally make it onto the store shelves - but even though hydrogen fuel enhancement kits and homeopathic medicines are EASILY available, they do not, cannot and will not ever work.


 * So...


 * Vaporware that finally appeared to my surprise...the Playstation 3 maybe. I was pretty sure the difficulties they had with making the darned thing would kill it.  The International Space Station - I didn't think that would ever get funded enough to get it even close to finished (although I still don't understand what it's for exactly!).  I'm beginning to think that the ultimate vaporware (Duke Nukem Forever) may yet see the light of day - that would be be ultimate 'from the grave' revival.


 * Snake oil that became "real"...that's tougher...Speech recognition software maybe. That stuff was just utterly useless when it first came out in the 1980's - it didn't work worth a damn, yet it was advertised and sold as "You can do dictation into your computer right now!"...they claimed 90% recognition rates...but they didn't get close to that and even if they had - having to correct one word in ten would get really frustrating amazingly quickly!  I didn't think I'd ever see it work - yet today it's quite routine for computerized call centers to ask you to speak names, numbers and such like and it works reliably - over nasty phone lines, with any speaker and a wide range of accents and (amazingly) without you having to "train" it for each speaker.  Dictation software is still a little flakey - but it's getting better and better.


 * SteveBaker (talk) 02:04, 3 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I thought the Optimus Maximus keyboard was vaporware as it was first unveiled in 2005 as a concept but didn't actually get built until 2007 and is now only just being released into the wild in bulk. It was even listed in the Vaporware Awards due to the amount of um'ing and ah'ing over it's release date. Nanonic (talk) 02:28, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Oooh! Yeah - that's an excellent example.  Now it's finally out, at something like $800, it's transitioned from "Vaporware" into the merely "Silly" category. SteveBaker (talk) 04:02, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I think the best example is Project Xanadu. Seems to be one of the longest vapourwares that eventually became reality to me. In terms of vapourware vs snakeoil, some of the examples given as vapourware could probably be called snakeoil. E.g. Glaze3D. There was also Rainbow Storage but I removed that Nil Einne (talk) 09:19, 4 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I went through many debates with the "inventor" of Rainbow storage - it was a ridiculous concept that could never possibly have worked - the guy had never even tried to store stuff in the way he claimed to be possible. His premise was (roughly) if you can print ASCII characters onto paper - you can store about 7 bits per character (ASCII coding - right) - but if you allow yourself to print triangles and hexagons and spirals and stars and...well, you can think of a VAST number of symbols and you can also print them in a variety of fonts and colors and pack even more information in there - then you can use different colored backgrounds and get even more - and you can overprint one symbol that's in red with a DIFFERENT symbol in yellow...and so forth.  Then he went on to come up with some wild guesses about the number of symbols that could be thought of - multiplied all of the numbers together and got data densities that are pure science-fiction.  What he didn't understand was that there IS a limit to the degree to which you can do this - and that is the resolution and color precision of your printer and scanner.  Printing fancy shapes and then recognizing them is hard - but simply printing a grid of colored dots has even higher bandwidth than this approach could truly produce because any pixel could take on any color.   When you look at the maximum possible density and the quality of color recognition - you get a theoretical maximum density that's many MANY orders of magnitude less than he was claiming.  Of course in practice, issues of registration, color bleed, aging of paper and dyes and a bunch of other issues means that the two-dimensional barcode systems already in widespread use are pretty much optimal - and their densities *SUCK*.  But the inventor was a bozo and couldn't be reasoned with.   Obviously he never could possibly have produced the crazy data capacities he was claiming - and he never once actually demonstrated it...except fraudulantly...so this was neither vaporware nor snake-oil. SteveBaker (talk) 04:14, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Where do non-standard airline call signs come from?
In communicating with air traffic control, most commercial airliners will use a Type C call sign which is the same as their name -- for example, United Airlines Flight 204 will be "United 204". However, a few carriers use other titles: British Airways goes by "Speedbird", ValuJet Airlines went by "Critter", and so on.

So here's my question -- why do some carriers end up with these different call signs? My initial idea was that they were used when the original name might be difficult or confusing in radio usage, but neither of the above examples seem to fit that (and an obvious potential confusion, using "Delta" for Delta Air Lines, refutes that -- the confusion being that "delta" also represents the letter D in the NATO phonetic alphabet, which is used in air traffic control operations).

Any ideas? Thanks for anyone taking the time to answer this; as a former administration here, I appreciate those who take time out of their day to try to help out people they've never met before. 70.122.36.93 (talk) 17:14, 2 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Well, we do have articles on airline call signs (and call signs in general) and on "speedbird" in particular. According to that article, when call signs were introduced, the company simply picked it to represent their logo at the time.  I suppose the process may have become more formal over time, but those old callsigns are still retained.  —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 17:26, 2 October 2008 (UTC)


 * According to the FAA, telephony designators "should, preferably, resemble the name of the [airline]", and not be more than two words or three syllables. Additionally, they say "letters" (presumably meaning both ae bee cee and alpha bravo charlie) will not be assigned, but existing assignations (like DELTA) will remain.  Two different airlines can use the same designator, providing they have a written agreement to avoid confusing conflicts (both Virgin Atlantic and Virgin Blue use VIRGIN, but Blue is only allowed to use it within Australia).  Non-standard designators seem to be mostly US domestic airlines (like Valujet) or very old callsigns (like BA's SPEEDBIRD or PanAm's CLIPPER). FiggyBee (talk) 06:29, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
 * The only addition I can make here is that like most everything else, history rules. If an airline has used a call-sign in the past, it can keep using it because everyone will recognize it. As an example, CP Air used the flight designator "CP" for many years. Long after it became Canadian Airlines, the flight number on the tickets was "CP720" (for instance). Why? Because the air-traffic controller would recognize the radio voice as it came into his territory "this is CP720 bound for Malpensa" and would know the exact plane and it's destination. Why change it when it's worked up 'til now? Franamax (talk) 00:10, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Earlier question regarding series of numbers correlated to number of strokes in roman equivalent
Hi,

Could you please help me find an earlier question and its answer regarding what the next number would be in series of numbers where the answer was to be found when converting the numbers into Roman numbers (i.e I, IV, X and so on) and then counting the strokes needed to write them?

I also have a similar question without answer. Can anyone find the logical continuation for 154967328?

Thank you for any help! ~Tigger —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.188.214.165 (talk) 18:45, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
 * 0. Matt Deres (talk) 20:42, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
 * The previous ref-desk thread you're referring to is the top one here. Deor (talk) 22:19, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

imimigration
Can an immigrant on a tourist visa legally work in the US if they own their own business —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.53.241.4 (talk) 19:29, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, we can't answer this question because it asks for legal advice. Darkspots (talk) 19:33, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
 * The questioner did not ask for legal advice; he asked what the law is. That's different. Unfortunately, I don't know the answer to his question. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 23:07, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Hmmm...let me rephrase. My friend says he has a tourist visa until 2012. Is that possible? D —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.53.241.4 (talk) 19:39, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Per the US State Department, the visa expiration date and the length of time you have permission to remain in the United States are very different terms. It appears that a visa lasting until 2012 is not unreasonable, however, as the FAQ discusses 5-year visas. &mdash; Lomn 20:17, 2 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Your friend should contact the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS--formerly the Immigration and Naturalization Service) for detailed, specific information about what he can or cannot do under his current visa. The InfoPass website (link) provides instructions (PDF) on how to contact USCIS by telephone (for routine inquiries) or to make an appointment for in-person discussion (for more detailed or complex quetions).  TenOfAllTrades(talk) 22:27, 2 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Your friend has it COMPLETELY WRONG. On a 'non-immigrant' "B-1" or "B-2" visitor visa (B-1 is for business travellers, athletes and the like, B-2 is for tourists) you can't stay for long periods - and you CERTAINLY can't work (although on a B-1 you can attend business meetings, conferences, etc so long as you are not paid in the US).  The visa has a long expiry date (you can obtain them for periods of between 3 months to 10 years if you're a businessman who comes to the US often for meetings and such) - but that doesn't mean you can stay here until the visa expires.  It means you can visit for periods of (typically) up to 30 days per year until it expires.  HOWEVER, the immigration officer at the airport (or whatever) is the person who decides how long you can stay - and this is an entirely discretionary thing as far as I can tell.  The date by which you must leave is stamped onto the "I-94" form you get as you enter the country.  In practice, if you tell those guys how long you'll be here and show a return ticket to prove it then they'll stamp that onto the I-94 so long as it's not more then 30 days and so long as you haven't already been in the US recently or for too long.  If you have a good story ("I'm going to the such-and-such conference that's in town this week") and a firm return flight then they aren't going to say no.  But this is what stops you taking a trip over the border to Mexico or Canada every 30 days and staying here more or less permenantly.  When your I-94 expires - you're an illegal immigrant whether you have a visitors visa or not.  Details here...and especially Here. SteveBaker (talk) 03:55, 3 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Why are we giving advice about U.S. immigration law? This is against our policy, folks. Darkspots (talk) 08:59, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
 * We're relaying that which is publicly available from official US government sites and citing it as such. Other than SteveBaker's "in practice", nothing above is novel synthesis or the like, and I have a hard time construing the "in practice" as "legal advice". &mdash; Lomn 13:00, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Lucrezia Borgia. -Arch dude (talk) 04:02, 3 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Your friend should not contact United States Citizenship and Immigration Services. There is no system for checking your immigration status within the United States unless your identify yourself. If he plans to stay until 2012 and start his own business he should contact a lawyer, but he should not contact the government until he knows his options. Staying without a valid visa is the easiest and often the best option.  Plasticup  T / C  04:31, 3 October 2008 (UTC)


 * This 'easiest' and 'best option' however, can be a terrible choice. Mr.K. (talk) 07:56, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Care to elaborate?  Plasticup  T / C  14:37, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
 * As a rule of thumb, it's usually best for people answering ref desk questions not to advice the OP to break the law... --Tango (talk) 15:57, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Tourists, per definition, are not allowed to work. If your friend is planning to immigrate to the US he should find a wife, a place to study, invest 1 million, open a new business (and create at least 10 jobs) or find a employee who would sponsor him. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mr.K. (talk • contribs) 08:16, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Besides that, the type of visa your friend can apply to, will depend on many factors. Having been working as a translator for the US troops in Iraq, would grant him special rights, that someone from Nigeria may not have. Being a UK national excludes him from the Green card lottery. Giving advice is impossible not only due to wikipedia's policies, but to the lack of basic information that we have. Mr.K. (talk) 09:53, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Women in combat roles in US military
Why are women not allowed to enter units intended for direct combat in the U.S military? Royal Orleans 21:13, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Because US law forbids it.  Little Red Riding Hood  talk  21:40, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I believe the relevant law is Women's Armed Services Integration Act, which allowed women into the regular army and determined in which roles they were allowed to serve. Darkspots (talk) 21:44, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
 * My reading is that the questioner probably knows it's legally forbidden, but wants to know why it's legally forbidden. --  JackofOz (talk) 22:43, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
 * It's a very good question - this is one of the last bastions of legalized sexism. The law was passed in 1948 - before that there were no women anywhere near the battlefront.  The law reflects views of the 1940's - protecting "the weaker sex" and all that nonsense.  It was a step in the right direction - but it's time to erase all differences and make women in the military fight just as the men must. SteveBaker (talk) 01:35, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Also, the question misrepresents the way that jobs are assigned in the military. When you join the military, regardless of what all the recruitment videos and commercials tell you, you do what you are told.  You don't get a job because you choose it, you get a job because someone with stars on their eppaulettes has decided they need to you do it.  Its not that there are thousands of women seeking frontline combat jobs, and being actively prevented from getting those jobs by the law.  They may or may not want those jobs, but that;s moot. The fact is, when you join the military, the people with a higher rank than you tell you what to do.  You get assigned a job and you do it.  Now, women are not assigned frontline combat positions, but thats not the same thing as saying they aren't allowed to choose to have them.  If a woman got to choose what her job in the military was, she'd have MORE rights then anyone else... --Jayron32. talk . contribs  02:38, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
 * In modern conflicts such as Iraq there is no front line, when the "war" is an occupation opposed by partisans (terrorists to some) who attack convoys and checkpoints. 61 American women have been killed by enemy action in Iraq as of July 17, 2008, probably more American service women than have been killed by enemy action (in compabet or in enemy attacks) in all previous wars. . This does not include those dead from disease, accidents or other causes. Edison (talk) 03:03, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
 * 61 women - and 3000 or so men. It's not exactly evidence of equality in the military is it?  If you observed that many servicewomen safely in barracks at home, you'd probably find that something close to that number would have died in car accidents, disease, natural causes, etc without being anywhere near enemy action. SteveBaker (talk) 03:18, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Not ethat these were combat deaths, not accidental or from disease. Many such deaths occurred in addiition to the 61. Edison (talk) 05:41, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Incidentally, in the Israeli Army men and women served at the front lines in integrated units until relatively recently, if I understand it correctly (and I don't claim to be an expert). They decided to segregate the units based on sex when they found that when women were injured in a unit, men in the same unit were more likely to commit war crimes and overreact aggressively—when men "took responsibility" for the women, psychologically speaking, they were more prone to be excessively violent than when they were serving with other men. For those who want a reference to the Israeli bit, I read it in On Killing: The Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in War and Society. Very interesting phenomena—and perhaps a good reason not to necessarily want total sex blindness when it comes to military work. (Not to mention the abysmally high level of rape and harassment of women in the US military in particular. Frankly I think an all-woman combat unit would probably do better than one integrated with men for a number of reasons.) --98.217.8.46 (talk) 03:25, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Energy conservation with natural gas in the home
I've read where energy can be conserved by turning the thermostat down to 60 (F) from 65 during the night. Is it really worth it? How about from 65 just to 62? Is it more cost effective to just keep it at 65? How much does one really save turning it down for only 7-8 hours at a time?

Also, does taking a shower use up a lot of energy becuase the water needs to be heated? If I cut down to 3 showers a week from 7, am I saving money? What about if I run a sishwasher while I shower, thus heating the water faster when I turn the shower on?

Of course, moving to Atlanta might just be better :-) Thanks.


 * Whenever you reduce the thermostat (assuming you're heating - not cooling!) you're saving energy - one degree - half a degree - every little helps. Shorter showers, cooler water - yep that'll help too.  The issue is where you become so uncomfortable that life becomes miserable for the sake of a few dollars.   I don't see how running the dishwasher while you shower helps though.  Most (if not all) dishwashers run from the cold water feed and heat the water using the dishwasher's own internal heater as needed.  That's not going to make any difference to your shower which is probably fed from your hot water tank.  The best way to make a shower more efficient is to get one with a 'flash heater'.  Those are quite popular in the UK - I havn't seen many of them in the US yet.  Like the dishwasher - it's fed from the cold water feed and heats up the water as it comes out of the pipe!  It heats exactly the amount of water you need - not a drop more.

It also avoids leaving all of that hot water in the pipe between the hot tank and the shower head. SteveBaker (talk) 01:29, 3 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Both of the dishwashers I've had (in Canada) have been plumbed to the hot water line; then there is a control to tell it whether to heat the water further or not, as you prefer. Perhaps it's different in places where demand water heaters (what Steve calls "flash" heaters) are common. --Anonymous, 03:35 UTC, October 3, 2008.

The answers always depend on specifics. In my house, the dishwasher draws from the hot water heater, so I can turn off the dishwasher's electric water heater and use natural gas, which is cheaper. Yes, turning down the thermostat helps, but the quantitative effect depends strongly on where you live. To get a major effect, you will need to make a major change: for example, you can cut your per-capita domestic energy consumption (almost) in half by finding a room-mate. You can cut your gasoline consumption by 20 percent by telecommutng one day a week. You can cut your gasoline consumption in half by moving closer to where you work. You can move from a house into an apartment. These major changes have a major impact on your energy usage. Minor changes (like a 5-degree thermostat change) will have minor effects. -Arch dude (talk) 03:32, 3 October 2008 (UTC)


 * In terms of thermostat settings, the question of how much you save is more to do with how cold it is outside. Because heat loss (per Newton's law of cooling) is proportional to the SQUARE of the temperature difference, if it's 60 degrees outside and you turn your thermostat down from 62 to 61, you'll knock 75% off your heating bill - but since the heater was probably hardly ever on in the first place, who cares? on the other hand, if it was zero degrees outside and you reduced from 62 to 61, the percentage saving would be 1-(612/622) which is only 3% of your bill - but since you need about a thousand times as much heat energy to keep your house warm when it's zero degrees outside than it is when it's 60 degrees outside (for a 62 degree thermostat setting), that 3% represents 30 times as much money saved.  So when the temperature difference is large, a small change in your thermostat setting will save you more money (in absolute terms) than when the temperature difference is small - but the percentage change in your heating bill will be less impressive.  (In reality, this is a gross over-simplification since most thermostats have a fairly wide tolerance so that they don't turn on until the temperature is a couple of degrees below what you set and they don't turn off again until it's a few degrees above what you set - hence if the thermostat is set to 62 and it's 60 outside - the heater will probably never turn on anyway).


 * I strongly agree that the big decisions (where you work, how you commute, what you drive, how your house is heated/cooled/insulated) have a much bigger effect than nudging the thermostat up or down a degree or two. But most people are unable to quickly change any of those big things - and the little things DO help.


 * But if you can plan in advance, you can do VASTLY better.


 * My house has walls that are a foot thick - with two layers of state-of-the-art insulation and a six inch thick concrete layer between the two to provide thermal inertial (see Insulating concrete forms for details) - brick (mostly for the look of the thing) on the outside and sheet-rock on the inside. We have as much attic insulation as will reasonably fit (between 1 foot and 3 feet) and a thermostatically controlled attic fan to bring in cooler air from outside when the attic space heats up during the day.  Here in Texas, for much of the year it's hot in the day and cold at night - but the 'inertia' of all of that concrete means that the house stays at pretty much exactly the average of the day and night temperatures - so the times of the year when we need to heat or aircondition is dramatically reduced and all of that insulation (about 5 times what most houses in Texas are build with) minimises losses so that what heating/cooling we do need to do is for shorter intervals.  Even at times when the nigttime temperature is so high that we still need to aircondition at night - or when it's so cold in the day that we're heating in the day - that "averaging" effect of the concrete means that (because of Newton's law of cooling) we never see the high peaks in consumption due to that "energy loss is proportional to the SQUARE of the temperature difference".  Mathematics and physics really works and our monthly electricity bills (this is an all-electric house) are less than a quarter of our neighbours over the year.


 * This fancy construction added about 5% to the construction cost of the house (and incidentally made it proof against 300mph winds - no small benefit in "tornado-alley", made it very quiet inside and seems to dramatically reduce the number of insects we find in the house because there are no gaps between slab and walls for them to sneak through). When you crunch the numbers, that extra 5% on the construction cost paid for itself in about 4 years of reduced electricity costs - and that's neglecting the other benefits.  If this became more widespread, it ought to be possible to negotiate a reduction in tornado/hurricane insurance too.


 * Using more concrete in construction is not a good thing - concrete requires a lot of energy to produce, so it's not just 5% on the COST of the house - but also a large increase in the CO2 footprint for the construction phase. However, I calculated that over the same 4 years it takes to recoup the 5% cost - you've also saved more CO2 than you produced when building the place...so again, there is a net win after about 4 years.  Since houses typically last for 30 to 100 years (especially the ones with solid concrete walls!) - there is no way to lose here.


 * It's easy to make that kind of decision when you're building a house - but the number of times most people get to do that in their lifetimes is roughly zero. Since people (foolishly) don't consider the insulation properties of a house when they buy it, builders don't want to add 5% to the cost because it makes them seem too expensive.  What is required is for government to require the gas and electric companies to pay that 5% on new homes and to allow them to charge extra on their bills to that customer until the 5% is paid off (with appropriate interest).  That extra cost on the energy bills could still pass on some of the savings due to efficient design onto the customer.  This would benefit home owners in the longer term and cost them nothing whatever (and perhaps save them a little) over the shorter term.  It would cost the energy suppliers nothing once the scheme is up and running - and because it would reduce the amount of new energy production infrastructure, would save them a fortune over the longer haul.  It would also help to save the planet - which is no small matter!


 * All it requires is for some legislator to write a law and vote it through...not rocket science by any means!


 * SteveBaker (talk) 13:14, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
 * That depends on where a person lives; a person with a wooden house in Florida would get laughed at. :) GO-PCHS-NJROTC  (Messages) 01:00, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

GEOMETRY MAGAZINE QUESTION
Hello,Iam a reader of a magazine called Geometry Today,I have a question for you guys. It`s a contest and the prize is ove a million dollars so I need your help. This is it,I have to name the intersection of two planes PQS AND HGS. and there is a question involving a line that lies in a plane,and onee line that does not lie in the plane.I know it`s a bit much,but I really want the money I`ll even split it with you guys. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.161.74.21 (talk) 23:28, 2 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Umm, "a magazine called Geometry Today"? A million dollars? Really? hydnjo talk 00:33, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Are you sure it's not Homework Tomorrow? Clarityfiend (talk) 00:45, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

There really is a set of seven math problems each of which has a million-dollar prize. See Millennium Prize Problems. Six of these remain unsolved. This is not one of them. -Arch dude (talk) 03:07, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Well, that's certainly something we could help with if we had the full details of the question - but the information you've given us is sketchy at best...nowhere near enough to answer your question. However, questions of intersections between lines and planes and such are amazingly easy to those who paid attention in school - and it's hard to believe that readers of a geometry magazine (who you'd thing would be REALLY expert) would have any trouble answering it. If it's really as easy as it sounds (on the basis of your very sketchy description) then probably tens of thousands of people will respond correctly and it'll end up being a total lottery. The biggest problem here though is that I get not one single hit when I type "Geometry Today Magazine" into Google's search engine...which does indeed make it seem like this is an exceedingly poor effort at getting us to help with homework. Poor, not only because it's so easy to disprove - so unlikely to start with - AND you didn't even give us enough information to answer the question even if you HAD fooled us.

For what it's worth, you have to find the equations of the two planes (the general form is Ax+By+Cz+D=0 where D is the distance of the plane from the origin at the closest point and (A,B,C) is the unit vector that's at right angles to the plane). With two such equations, you can substitute one into the other to find the equation of their line of intersection. Finding where two lines intersect is a similar problem - you have two parameteric line equations and you can solve those two equations to find the point at which they intersect (if indeed they DO intersect).


 * SteveBaker (talk) 03:12, 3 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Can't hardly wait to see what happens when he turns that in tomorrow! -hydnjo talk 03:21, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

There was someone on the reference desks a year or two ago who posted a bunch of obvious homework questions claiming that they were attempts to win prizes from magazines. I wonder if this is the same person returning. --Anonymous, 03:38 UTC, October 3, 2008.


 * That's possible but it seems that the half-life of these folks is less than our usual response time. Suppose it could be a resurrection but that would mean that he's flat-lined. -hydnjo talk 04:25, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
 * "PHYSICS MAGAZINE GUY" was his moniker. AlmostReadytoFly (talk) 07:56, 3 October 2008 (UTC)


 * If you send this problem to the Mathematics reference desk I'm sure they'll give it the attention it deserves :) Dmcq (talk) 09:58, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
 * You should know that my computer has "cut" and "paste" features! SteveBaker (talk) 12:22, 3 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm interested in knowing where a magazine called "Geometry Today" would get a million dollars. APL (talk) 18:57, 3 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Possibly a very productive question. Sounds like the answer to this might also answer the question earlier about what's the easiest job that gives lots of money. Dmcq (talk) 20:47, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
 * As a quick Google indicates, no magazine called "Geometry Today" exists.  bibliomaniac 1  5  22:41, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, it might exist - Google doesn't cover every entity in the world - but the owners may never have heard of the internet, or consider that there's no reason or point in having a website. --  JackofOz (talk) 21:29, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Not to sound snotty, but if one of us knew the answer, wouldn't we hurry up and send it in our self and just totally blow you off? :) GO-PCHS-NJROTC  (Messages) 01:03, 9 October 2008 (UTC)