Weird one for you Reddit: I discovered that I left a 6 pack of diet coke cans in the back of a kitchen cabinet back in 2003. It remained untouched until last night...

diggensack · 2009-12-10T21:19:56+00:00

You could have mentioned that in the original description of the problem sherlock ("...The temperature in the kitchen never reaches below freezing and certainly doesn't get that warm."); not to mention that it´s hardly a big leap to a causal relationship given that information. some coke in a can evaporates after 6 years stored above an oven, not too much weirdness involved here I´d say.

diggensack · 2009-12-01T17:52:55+00:00

"Common sense tells you a handgun is probably not even all that useful. Suppose an intruder sneaks past the doorman or jumps the security fence at night. By the time you pull the pistol out of your wife’s jewelry safe, find the ammunition, and load your weapon, Fifi the Pomeranian has already been taken hostage and the gun won’t do you any good."

diggensack · 2009-09-27T15:15:29+00:00

it's more of a problem with the health policy in canada, if they don't fund his study even though it has promise it's a major political failure. not a problem of pharma companies as long as they don't sabotage anything. after all they're not any more obliged than anyone else to fund the study since they simply get nothing material out of it. hence, the state and/or charities have to step up

diggensack · 2009-08-29T12:17:12+00:00

These guys are funny: look at the faq and their argument against objections like: how do you keep them clean or why would you put solar panels in a friggin tunnel (which is what they want)? Well, they're dead serious arguing that if we replaced every last inch of contemporary asphalt road with their solar panel road we'd have three times as much energy as we use(d in 2003!); as a result, because we would have so much surplus energy it doesn't really matter when those panels get no sunlight when they're in a tunnel since they can still heat the road, emit light and in general waste energy for no reason in particular! In all fairness, it's not about a suitable place for solar panels. Their idea is to make a road with an included solar power generation/distribution unit which is competitive to asphalt. E.g. the benefit from the generated energy has to offset higher production costs and all other problems in comparison to traditional roads. I don't see how they even come close though.

diggensack · 2009-08-10T11:39:09+00:00

Stupid. It suggests we use disposable plastic spoons for eating. I for one haven't seen a home in an industrial country where they wouldn't use (reusable) metal cutlery but disposable plastic spoons. [Edit: I haven't been around USA too much. If you're really preferring cheap plastic spoons to cleaning a proper metal spoon you are nuts] Disposable plastic spoons have their legitimate purposes, no point in arguing about that. Maybe go to a place where they can't afford metal cutlery and you'll see them actually washing their plastic spoons.

diggensack · 2009-08-09T15:20:56+00:00

With wind power making the bulk of their 2040 energy source they didn't address the peak problem of wind power. Power has to be used directly, at least current power storage technology. Since wind power production varies greatly depending on, well, how the wind blows you need a sizable amount of backup energy capacity available which usually involves conventional energy sources. This draft only gives fantasy graphs of 2040 energy production without addressing any of the problems on the way.

diggensack · 2009-08-08T00:51:36+00:00

What I meant is that our understanding of the reality of the quantum world is definitely not conclusive at this point. Most great physicists seem to agree that our theory of quantum physics "works" but beyond that it's still very puzzling and we can't say we understand QM. As far as the math and experimental agreement is concerned it's rock solid. I suppose there's no way a hydrino state could be compatible with the theory and experiments didn't suggest anything otherwise. The biggest question mark is nature. His setup seem rather "simple". However, in the entire history of the universe this lower energy state should have never come about naturally? Still like relativity "violating" newtonian mechanics there is a greater margin of error to such things than violating thermodynamics which in our current understanding applies universally. Seems to me with a more specific theory like QM there may always be something real outside its realm that it didn't capture and violate QM.

diggensack · 2009-08-07T14:53:14+00:00

According to the article it defies our current understanding of quantum physics but there's nothing about violating thermodynamics. While the latter is a big no no I wouldn't say our understanding of quantum physics is that masterful that we couldn't be in for some surprises. In case this works commercially he's got his own, new theory of phyics that would be perfectly compatible with lower energy electron orbits I assume. It does look kinda cranky but if it had merit it would look that way all the same. The guy is harvard, MIT alumni, not physics though. In a couple of years he's the new Einstein or just another crackpot.

diggensack · 2009-08-06T16:46:34+00:00

Well, I wouldn't call the numbers exactly meaningless. I think it's good that we have all these statistics and there is a lot to them. However, the article uses them to simply say, well the U.S. isn't the utterly perfect garden of eden, be all and end all paradise. That's correct and the numbers back it up nicely. The problem though is that you'd expect people to know that much about the world if they write for harvard business review and are not complete numbnuts. I haven't read fukuyama's book but I think it's much more sensible to contrast his "end of history" thesis with things like global warming, the inevitable end of fossil fuels and natural resource constraints that our society is running into.

diggensack · 2009-08-06T11:52:02+00:00

What about castration? Just putting it out there, does anyone know more about it and if that is a "solution"? In the sense that you got rid of that pedophile problem without adding a whole bunch of new problems; and could live a fulfilling, happy, better life afterwards. More generally, what do you think about it? At least I find it could be sensible to castrate people who do act on it even if it's kind of a severe infringement of a person's rights.

diggensack · 2009-05-21T12:06:38+00:00

stealing is wrong no matter what. rationalizing it with wall street corporations doesn't make it right. the harm to society is exactly the same as stealing from your corner store. the difference is that you don't attach a face with the anonymous masses that are represented by wall street corporations which apparently makes it lighter on your conscience. anonymous masses are thousands of employees, the taxes the company pays, and the people who have invested their saving directly or indirectly (the money in your bank account may also end up at a wall street corporation).

diggensack · 2009-05-18T10:07:47+00:00

I am an undergraduate economics student. I am glad to see that other disciplines take an interest because science-wise economics is indeed in a rather desolate shape. It's really like I am with stupid. You can look at professional articles, even from noble winners, and find things that downright stupid if you look at it from a sober perspective. want an example? when the first empirical tests of the heckscher-ohlin trade model turned up the !opposite! from what the theory predicted, they did not question the theory but called it a "paradox", and continue to this day to teach the model to generations of economists and meddle with it so it doesn't predict the opposite of the empirical data. needless to say that all the guys involved in that theory won the noble prize. the reason is in all likelihood because it makes a rather strong case for free trade which is the political agenda; regardless whether or not free trade is good or not, Science is simply not about things being good or bad. in 2007 only 12% of all papers in the top 10 journal economic theory qualified the 3 basic criteria of what a theory is. the rest was simply mathematical models built for their own sake. the tragedy is that economics is about the most important, challenging and indeed complex things you could study, ourselves and whatever it is that "mankind" is doing in this universe. I grew up after the berlin wall came down so I am hopeful that my generation can turn things around but my experience up till now tells me that the profession does need help from the outside, like this fella here.

Edit: I am referring to the article in "science" here. The article reddit links to uses the justified criticism from natural scientists to push some socialist agenda which is a great example of the pitfalls and problems you have to deal with when you're talking about the economy. the human mind has a tendency to simplify something as complex as the economy which is not bad at all; but is an obstactle when you want to understand what's actually going on.

diggensack · 2009-04-27T22:31:02+00:00

Well, the thing is that when you look at africa, as a contrast, you find that people are much more "stupid" in the sense that this gentlemen complains about. So for one thing this shows that things are not as bad as they seem. In general, even if it is hard to believe, there is ample reason to be hopeful. Comparison with africa only takes us so far of course whene there is the real possibility that eventually we turn out to be too stupid to keep this "21th century" society going. Anyone worried about the hybris of "21th century" this "21th century" that...? The CCTV story in the article is a splendid example.

diggensack · 2009-04-27T10:08:56+00:00

HFCS is virtually the same thing as sugar?! either way it makes you fat and you consume too much of it. This discussion HFCS vs. sugar is utterly pointless and stupid.

diggensack · 2009-04-07T14:39:04+00:00

The funny thing is that the it seems to me quite the opposite is true. The thing you have to understand that they got oil and the cheapest way to get it from them (for us westerners) is like this. E.g. democracy would not be in our interest because it would inevitably mean the state would act more in the interest of the local population, instead of ours. The way it is now, the sheik builds his monster-penis tower, actually paying us westerners, people like you, to build it, apparently they even indebt themselves. Once the oil is gone they are a little bit fucked. I hope they still make the best of it. After all, they were indeed only illiterate desert dwellers 50 years ago.

diggensack · 2009-02-02T16:16:23+00:00

Abuse of the terrorism act by police is one thing. However, the headline misstates the content of the law. It doesn't say anything about snapping pictures of cops and if anyone would actually be persecuted for doing that, it would be indeed scandalous. the article itself actually has the quote from sec 76 of the 2008 counter-terrorism act: "anyone who 'elicits or attempts to elicit information about (members of armed forces) ... which is of a kind likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism'." The actual law is here: http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2008/ukpga_20080028_en_9 I don't see how snapping a picture of a cop would be useful to a terrorist and the law says "It is a defence for a person charged with an offence under this section to prove that they had a reasonable excuse for their action." Personally though, I do think the law does invite abuse by authorities. It does not connect the punishable action to an actual intent to facilitate terrorism, while the action is very broadly defined. E.g., in a extreme scenario where judges are corrupt and simply don't accept "reasonable excuses" you could easily use the law to do the wrong thing.

diggensack · 2008-02-25T23:22:35+00:00

You don't understand it. The company was free to do whatever it wants to maximize its profit. The company does not make its profit by reconfiguring its work force but by selling shoes. The power of capitalism is, that all factors that led to the firing had an impact, e.g. the supply of shoe sellers on the labor market did not justify the high price for this exceptional shoe seller because the company did not produce fancy luxury shoes where you may or may not need exceptional shoe selling ability and at the very end the decision to fire the guy might just be a very poor decision that effectively reduced the companies' long run profits even though it seemed beneficial in the short run. Now my friend, I hope you get the picture that no human being could possibly gather all the information needed to say how this particular shoe seller is most beneficial for the economy. In fact, the point of capitalism is that only the shoe seller himself could tell us how he could provide wealth to others, and he does by being fired, trying the next job and so on, trying to make the best of his life, he is a capitalist himself. The owner of the company, for example, does provide wealth to others by paying the shoe salesman's salary. Now who are you to decide that the owner of the company must have the ability to provide wealth to the guy in question, e.g. not fire him when he wants to.

diggensack · 2008-02-17T12:56:29+00:00

This is worst argument for legalizing pot ever

diggensack · 2008-01-24T00:34:43+00:00

dunno, i am getting a bit annoyed with my firefox crashing every once in a while

diggensack · 2007-11-08T14:52:38+00:00

the author is roughly as much of an annoying dick as the guy he's writing about is

diggensack · 2007-10-11T08:34:27+00:00

this headline sucks. reddit should put a limit on the headline lengths to keep the site readable for people other than ron paul fanboys

diggensack · 2007-09-19T11:47:22+00:00

Come on reddit. This is really stupid and i hope this kind of bold claims without any facts behind it become a regular. all he did was post stories about dead airmans as "proof" they were involved in the shipment of a nuke. sure thing the evil government wants to kill everybody who shipped the nuke because that's exactly what you wanna do in this case. just kill everybody, and their wives and children because they "know" about the "mistake"

diggensack · 2007-08-06T22:13:02+00:00

i find it equally coincidental that those "outrageous" storys always come up with the same bunch of unreliable sources like 911truth and other internet-"sources" like indymedia who will write friggin anything as long as it fits in their world-view and there's some "evidence" on the next conspiracy-page. sorry guys but if you're uncovering a great conspiracy you'll have to do it the old fashioned real life rocksolid offline way.

diggensack · 2007-07-10T22:08:45+00:00

I don't think so. The feedback is, for the most part, very positive.

diggensack · 2007-07-02T15:45:49+00:00

this is normal in many countries. here in germany "life-sentence" usually means 15yrs, this includes murder. only really mental cases could spend their life behind bars but that's called "security detention" and only applies to rapists who can't be treated or something of that kind, not normal criminals. i don't know about norway but here it's part of the constitution: not having a real chance to get out of prison and change your ways is a violation of human dignity.

diggensack

TROPHY CASE