|
On November 15 2016 03:18 Djzapz wrote:
I just checked and he's online right now in "Private messaging" so as far as I know he's in the process of sending me the tracking number, but I don't know. How long should I wait before I ask for an update, considering I asked for an update on the registration on Tuesday last week since he didn't get it done on Monday like he said he would?
Well I ended up checking with him and he said "tomorrow first thing in the morning" and I haven't ****ing heard since. He logged on his account earlier, I saw him online, and he didn't ****ing update me. I have 0 doubt that he'll ship it out but fucking hell dude -_-.
He's fucking online right now, "viewing a thread". I'm creeping on this motherfucker and his comms are shit. Fucking tell me what's going on you god damn asshole, wtf.
Edit: Just had to ask him. He "forgot" about it. Dude -_-.
|
If a man got breast implants and went on public television, would his boobs have to be censored?
|
On November 17 2016 08:43 Epishade wrote:
If a man got breast implants and went on public television, would his boobs have to be censored?
In the US the FCC decides that. According to their website:
What makes material indecent? Indecent material contains sexual or excretory material that does not rise to the level of obscenity. For this reason, the courts have held that indecent material is protected by the First Amendment and cannot be banned entirely. It may, however, be restricted to avoid its broadcast during times of the day when there is a reasonable risk that children may be in the audience. The FCC has determined, with the approval of the courts, that there is a reasonable risk that children will be in the audience from 6 a.m. to 10 p.m., local time. Therefore, the FCC prohibits station licensees from broadcasting indecent material during that period.
Material is indecent if, in context, it depicts or describes sexual or excretory organs or activities in terms patently offensive as measured by contemporary community standards for the broadcast medium. In each case, the FCC must determine whether the material describes or depicts sexual or excretory organs or activities and, if so, whether the material is patently offensive.
In our assessment of whether material is patently offensive, context is critical. The FCC looks at three primary factors when analyzing broadcast material: (1) whether the description or depiction is explicit or graphic; (2) whether the material dwells on or repeats at length descriptions or depictions of sexual or excretory organs; and (3) whether the material appears to pander or is used to titillate or shock. No single factor is determinative. The FCC weighs and balances these factors because each case presents its own mix of these, and possibly other, factors.
So...yeah probably. Though it would depend on why that person is barechested on public tv in the first place.
|
Did you know the hero goliath has 1 less ground range than the goliath?
|
On November 20 2016 14:13 oBlade wrote:
Did you know the hero goliath has 1 less ground range than the goliath?
I didn't. No wonder Alan Schezar lost.
|
If an airplane (big jetliner) wants to just keep in the air, making circles, what is the optimal height/speed combination, if there is no other limitation? Is it the slowest possible speed with clean wing, or is it worth extending flaps despite the added drag? Is it better to stay high to minimize drag or low to lower the stall speed?
|
On November 20 2016 16:39 opisska wrote:
If an airplane (big jetliner) wants to just keep in the air, making circles, what is the optimal height/speed combination, if there is no other limitation? Is it the slowest possible speed with clean wing, or is it worth extending flaps despite the added drag? Is it better to stay high to minimize drag or low to lower the stall speed?
Looking at how gliders (without engines) are designed, I'd think you don't want flaps. Probably find a spot with up-draft. Air resistance scales with square of the speed, lift I think would scale linearly? If so, you'd want to go as slow as you can without stalling I guess...
But disclaimer, I'm not into these things, just theory crafting.
|
On November 20 2016 16:55 Cascade wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2016 16:39 opisska wrote:
If an airplane (big jetliner) wants to just keep in the air, making circles, what is the optimal height/speed combination, if there is no other limitation? Is it the slowest possible speed with clean wing, or is it worth extending flaps despite the added drag? Is it better to stay high to minimize drag or low to lower the stall speed? Looking at how gliders (without engines) are designed, I'd think you don't want flaps. Probably find a spot with up-draft. Air resistance scales with square of the speed, lift I think would scale linearly? If so, you'd want to go as slow as you can without stalling I guess... . But disclaimer, I'm not into these things, just theory crafting.
I don't think you can efficiently use updraft with a jetliner, the stall speed without flaps is what, 300-400 km/s? Those air currents are gonna speed by pretty fast  But otherwise I think it's a good answer.
|
On November 20 2016 16:39 opisska wrote:
If an airplane (big jetliner) wants to just keep in the air, making circles, what is the optimal height/speed combination, if there is no other limitation? Is it the slowest possible speed with clean wing, or is it worth extending flaps despite the added drag? Is it better to stay high to minimize drag or low to lower the stall speed?
You're asking what the ideal holding pattern is which varies from plane to plane.
For speed you minimize fuel consumption by going at the plane's minimum drag speed (green dot speed). In practice you want to go a bit above that, since turning increases the minimum drag speed, and flying below that makes the plane unstable.
For height you want to minimize drag speed and thrust specific fuel consumption. To minimize the thrust specific fuel consumption you have to fly high, whereas you have to fly low to minimize drag, so you have to strike a balance. Note: This is a bit counter-intuitive since drag should decrease with decreasing air density, but it actually increases due to stuff having to do with kinematic viscosity I think.
For actual numbers look at pages 62-67 of this pdf: http://ansperformance.eu/references/library/airbus-fuel-economy.pdf
|
On November 20 2016 17:10 ZigguratOfUr wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2016 16:39 opisska wrote:
If an airplane (big jetliner) wants to just keep in the air, making circles, what is the optimal height/speed combination, if there is no other limitation? Is it the slowest possible speed with clean wing, or is it worth extending flaps despite the added drag? Is it better to stay high to minimize drag or low to lower the stall speed? You're asking what the ideal holding pattern is which varies from plane to plane. For speed you minimize fuel consumption by going at the plane's minimum drag speed (green dot speed). In practice you want to go a bit above that, since turning increases the minimum drag speed, and flying below that makes the plane unstable. For height you want to minimize drag speed and thrust specific fuel consumption. To minimize the thrust specific fuel consumption you have to fly high, whereas you have to fly low to minimize drag, so you have to strike a balance. Note: This is a bit counter-intuitive since drag should decrease with decreasing air density, but it actually increases due to stuff having to do with kinematic viscosity I think. For actual numbers look at pages 62-67 of this pdf: http://ansperformance.eu/references/library/airbus-fuel-economy.pdf
There is even a table with optimal altitudes and increase in fuel consumption at different level, as well as graphs for different speeds - that it quite an answer
|
What is a good reference to every day medicine?
My parents have two shelves full of every day stuff just in case of sickness... I don't have anything but ibuprofen, multivitamins, ascorbic acid, vitamin B and vitamin D alchaseltzers (on phone, too much work to check spelling, but butchered), uhh vapo rub, cough syrup, nasal decongestant spray, and vitamin e cream to heal a scar from stitches.
Everyone just seems to have their cupboards full, do I need any of this other stuff?
|
On November 21 2016 03:44 FiWiFaKi wrote:
What is a good reference to every day medicine?
My parents have two shelves full of every day stuff just in case of sickness... I don't have anything but ibuprofen, multivitamins, ascorbic acid, vitamin B and vitamin D alchaseltzers (on phone, too much work to check spelling, but butchered), uhh vapo rub, cough syrup, nasal decongestant spray, and vitamin e cream to heal a scar from stitches.
Everyone just seems to have their cupboards full, do I need any of this other stuff?
That's extremely individual though. In principle, you don't need any medicine - well, I don't know about overseas, but in my country, all "serious" medicine is prescription only and taking stuff like ibuprofen is not actually helping you, so unless you are prone to strong pains, you shouldn't take it like chocolate anyway.
For example, I have several recurring issues, so I have my asthma meds (prescription) and antihistaminics (free), then I admit I do have ibuprofen, but take it extremely rarely, usually just for insufferable back ache (almost never for sickness, as having fever is actually better for healing) and then I have active carbon for digestion (I travel a lot and have issues adjusting) and some pills that support veins because I get hemorrhoids from too much sitting, but these pills have zero side effects (some doctors say that everyone would be better off taking them, if they weren't so expensive).
Yeah, modern medicine is great, but it is particularly great for healing serious things. If you have a mild issue, just bite the bullet, you'll be better off in the long run.
|
Wow. All I really have for day-to-day use is ibuprofen. I guess strepsils count, but they're more placebo than anything else.
We also have a first aide kit, which I guess we use from time to time at home, but I keep it stocked for our hiking trips, not really for home use. Band-aids, anti-septic, gauze, cotton wool and a bandage, heat foil (against hypothermia), antihistamine (both tablets and cream), a stretch bandage (sprains etc), an assortment of things for blisters (none of which work particularly well), some activated charcoal and immodium. Some of that is obviously useful for things like slicing into your finger in the kitchen (or walking into a door). But really, mostly just ibuprofen.
|
All I have is a small first aid kit with bandaids and such, don't even have ibuprofen...can't think of a time in the past few years when I ever needed anything more than a bandaid.
|
|
|
On November 21 2016 03:51 opisska wrote:Show nested quote +On November 21 2016 03:44 FiWiFaKi wrote:
What is a good reference to every day medicine?
My parents have two shelves full of every day stuff just in case of sickness... I don't have anything but ibuprofen, multivitamins, ascorbic acid, vitamin B and vitamin D alchaseltzers (on phone, too much work to check spelling, but butchered), uhh vapo rub, cough syrup, nasal decongestant spray, and vitamin e cream to heal a scar from stitches.
Everyone just seems to have their cupboards full, do I need any of this other stuff? That's extremely individual though. In principle, you don't need any medicine - well, I don't know about overseas, but in my country, all "serious" medicine is prescription only and taking stuff like ibuprofen is not actually helping you, so unless you are prone to strong pains, you shouldn't take it like chocolate anyway. For example, I have several recurring issues, so I have my asthma meds (prescription) and antihistaminics (free), then I admit I do have ibuprofen, but take it extremely rarely, usually just for insufferable back ache (almost never for sickness, as having fever is actually better for healing) and then I have active carbon for digestion (I travel a lot and have issues adjusting) and some pills that support veins because I get hemorrhoids from too much sitting, but these pills have zero side effects (some doctors say that everyone would be better off taking them, if they weren't so expensive). Yeah, modern medicine is great, but it is particularly great for healing serious things. If you have a mild issue, just bite the bullet, you'll be better off in the long run.
Why should not take painkillers like ibuprofen when you got a cold for example? It won't cure it, but it'll help you stuff done while you have it. And I don't quite see how "biting the bullet" makes me better off in the long run, when I can take painkillers.
Are you saying there are long term side effects?
|
On November 21 2016 08:11 Cascade wrote:Show nested quote +On November 21 2016 03:51 opisska wrote:On November 21 2016 03:44 FiWiFaKi wrote:
What is a good reference to every day medicine?
My parents have two shelves full of every day stuff just in case of sickness... I don't have anything but ibuprofen, multivitamins, ascorbic acid, vitamin B and vitamin D alchaseltzers (on phone, too much work to check spelling, but butchered), uhh vapo rub, cough syrup, nasal decongestant spray, and vitamin e cream to heal a scar from stitches.
Everyone just seems to have their cupboards full, do I need any of this other stuff? That's extremely individual though. In principle, you don't need any medicine - well, I don't know about overseas, but in my country, all "serious" medicine is prescription only and taking stuff like ibuprofen is not actually helping you, so unless you are prone to strong pains, you shouldn't take it like chocolate anyway. For example, I have several recurring issues, so I have my asthma meds (prescription) and antihistaminics (free), then I admit I do have ibuprofen, but take it extremely rarely, usually just for insufferable back ache (almost never for sickness, as having fever is actually better for healing) and then I have active carbon for digestion (I travel a lot and have issues adjusting) and some pills that support veins because I get hemorrhoids from too much sitting, but these pills have zero side effects (some doctors say that everyone would be better off taking them, if they weren't so expensive). Yeah, modern medicine is great, but it is particularly great for healing serious things. If you have a mild issue, just bite the bullet, you'll be better off in the long run. Why should not take painkillers like ibuprofen when you got a cold for example? It won't cure it, but it'll help you stuff done while you have it. And I don't quite see how "biting the bullet" makes me better off in the long run, when I can take painkillers. Are you saying there are long term side effects?
Yeah NSAIDs can cause digestive tract and kidney problems. Depends on how often you take them though.
|
You just gotta believe in your own body mang. The immune system is so complex, variable and fascinating.
It'll make you stronger to let yourself heal from a pathogen without interference (my conviction, is strongly debatable), but do absolutely seek medical help if you got something that your body innately can't deal with (HIV barring you're naturally immune against it, Ebola, you know, the usual shit).
|
On November 21 2016 11:41 Uldridge wrote:
You just gotta believe in your own body mang. The immune system is so complex, variable and fascinating.
It'll make you stronger to let yourself heal from a pathogen without interference (my conviction, is strongly debatable), but do absolutely seek medical help if you got something that your body innately can't deal with (HIV barring you're naturally immune against it, Ebola, you know, the usual shit).
Painkillers interfere with the immune system?
|
On November 21 2016 11:48 Cascade wrote:Show nested quote +On November 21 2016 11:41 Uldridge wrote:
You just gotta believe in your own body mang. The immune system is so complex, variable and fascinating.
It'll make you stronger to let yourself heal from a pathogen without interference (my conviction, is strongly debatable), but do absolutely seek medical help if you got something that your body innately can't deal with (HIV barring you're naturally immune against it, Ebola, you know, the usual shit). Painkillers interfere with the immune system?
Some studies suggest that NSAIDs like ibuprofen can interfere with antibody synthesis, which is bad for people with weaker immune systems (e.g children and the elderly). No evidence for any long term effects on it however.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
