 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
>> Minutes?
>>
>> I'm not talking about fluorescent tubes...
>
> I'm talking about things like
> http://www.ipaa.org/Blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/cfl_bulb_mercury3.jpg
>
> I think it's actually the ballast that has to warm up, not the tube
> itself? Or maybe the mercury has to vaporize? (The old "Mercury Vapor"
> lights take about 10 or 15 minutes to get fully bright.)
Yeah - those are the ones. Mine seem to come on within a second.
Perhaps they _do_ get brighter over 10 minutes, but I don't notice it -
they're sufficiently bright when I turn them on.
Are yours old (as in like a decade)? I only started using them about 6
or so years ago (and frankly, am not sure they're cheaper overall - they
die quicker than expected).
--
May your screen live long and phosphor.
/\ /\ /\ /
/ \/ \ u e e n / \/ a w a z
>>>>>>mue### [at] nawaz org<<<<<<
anl
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
feet1st wrote:
> lifetimes to research. For those that believe the government should pay for all
> the research required, I'll just remind you that for every dollar that goes in
> to the government, much of it is consumed in paying interest on debts for past
> grand mistakes and misuse of the money we entrusted them with. It would be MUCH
> more efficient if your dollar went directly to the research of your choice.
Did you bother reading all of "somebody"'s posts before replying? In
another message (not the one you're replying to), he said:
"In short, just turn off your PC at night and donate part of the savings
to your favourite research. It would probably be more beneficial for all."
So he's certainly not against donating money. And I snipped some of the
context - but his point was that if all the people running these
software instead donate money to support running a _dedicated_ cluster,
then the calculations may be more efficient.
I don't necessarily (dis)agree, and the two aren't mutually exclusive.
--
May your screen live long and phosphor.
/\ /\ /\ /
/ \/ \ u e e n / \/ a w a z
>>>>>>mue### [at] nawazorg<<<<<<
anl
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 10 Mar 2009 11:24:18 -0700, Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
>I'd much rather just give the $25 to a homeless person.
That's what I do. At least I know that the homeless person can get a bite to eat
or a drink to help get to sleep.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Mueen Nawaz wrote:
> Yeah - those are the ones. Mine seem to come on within a second.
As I think I mentioned, it seems to be a mostly-solved problem. It used to
take tens of minutes, and when that batch burned out the new ones took maybe
2 or 3 minutes, and this most recent batch come on within maybe 5 seconds,
but I don't think they're as bright as the old ones were. Or my eyes are
aging faster than I want to believe. :-)
Perhaps they traded off something to make them warm up faster? I wouldn't be
surprised if the bulbs last much shorter than they could in order to be
bright quickly.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
My fortune cookie said, "You will soon be
unable to read this, even at arm's length."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Stephen <mcavoysAT@aolDOTcom> wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Mar 2009 11:24:18 -0700, Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
>
> >I'd much rather just give the $25 to a homeless person.
>
> That's what I do. At least I know that the homeless person can get a bite to eat
> or a drink to help get to sleep.
> --
>
> Regards
> Stephen
Then you have the problem of how do you know the person is homeless? There are
those that pack the dog and the cardboard sign in the car and drive over to
where lots of people go by, and sit there until they've got much more then is
required. Haven't you read the stories about the beggers outside of Wal-mart
making more, and tax free, then the employees on the inside of the Wal-mart?
Why don't you trust your government to KNOW which people are truely needy and
allocate appropriate money to provide enough food for them?
So you see, even the simplicity of giving to the needy can this alternative view
possible. "I'm not qualified to decide which homeless person really needs my
help, so I pay my taxes and count on the experts, which all work for the
government I guess, to do it." So, I suggest you save your $25 and instead give
them a case of soup, and two gallons of water. These things can't really be used
for any purpose other then your intended purpose.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
feet1st wrote:
> Then you have the problem of how do you know the person is homeless?
There's one "disabled vet" who hangs out around a shopping mall near us. He
alternates limps. One day he'll have a bum left leg, the next day a bum
right leg. :-)
On the other hand, when the young couple with the baby point to their car
full to the brim with stuff, I'm pretty sure they're not hanging around the
shopping center because it's profitable.
> Why don't you trust your government to KNOW which people are truely needy and
> allocate appropriate money to provide enough food for them?
You, uh, haven't been reading the news about the US economy lately, have you?
> "I'm not qualified to decide which homeless person really needs my help,
You may not be. I think I am.
> so I pay my taxes and count on the experts, which all work for the
> government I guess, to do it."
No. I usually give to charities that I have found use a majority of the
money to help people.
> So, I suggest you save your $25 and instead give
> them a case of soup, and two gallons of water.
No, I give $25 to Father Joe and let him feed 10 or 15 people a complete dinner.
> These things can't really be used for any purpose other then your intended purpose.
"I didn't give that homeless guy any money, because he'd just spend it on
drugs and alcohol. Then I thought, wait a minute, that's what *I* was going
to spend it on."
How am I supposed to judge what the best use of a homeless person's money
is, if I supposedly can't even figure out if they're homeless?
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
My fortune cookie said, "You will soon be
unable to read this, even at arm's length."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"feet1st" <nomail@nomail> wrote in message
news:web.49b991b5e57dbb08a45f86ff0@news.povray.org...
> Then you have the problem of how do you know the person is homeless? There
are
> those that pack the dog and the cardboard sign in the car and drive over
to
> where lots of people go by, and sit there until they've got much more then
is
> required. Haven't you read the stories about the beggers outside of
Wal-mart
> making more, and tax free, then the employees on the inside of the
Wal-mart?
Easy. Only give money to those not asking for it.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 12 Mar 2009 18:50:29 EDT, "feet1st" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
>
>Then you have the problem of how do you know the person is homeless?
Not a problem.
>There are
>those that pack the dog and the cardboard sign in the car and drive over to
>where lots of people go by, and sit there until they've got much more then is
>required.
Drive home in their Mercs, do they?
>Haven't you read the stories about the beggers outside of Wal-mart
>making more, and tax free, then the employees on the inside of the Wal-mart?
>
Why would I be reading about beggars outside of Wal-mart? There are enough in my
own country
.
>Why don't you trust your government to KNOW which people are truely needy and
>allocate appropriate money to provide enough food for them?
>
Ha! You are joking, aren't you? Do you mean the very same government that tells
the public lies to get their approval to go to war? The same government that
destroys the unions or tries to kick people off invalidly benefit and keeps
pensioners poor?
>So you see, even the simplicity of giving to the needy can this alternative view
>possible. "I'm not qualified to decide which homeless person really needs my
>help, so I pay my taxes and count on the experts, which all work for the
>government I guess, to do it."
Sorry I don't understand what you mean.
> So, I suggest you save your $25 and instead give
>them a case of soup, and two gallons of water. These things can't really be used
>for any purpose other then your intended purpose.
>
What a kind and caring person you sound. Feet first indeed!
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 12 Mar 2009 16:02:13 -0700, Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
>
>"I didn't give that homeless guy any money, because he'd just spend it on
>drugs and alcohol. Then I thought, wait a minute, that's what *I* was going
>to spend it on."
>
>How am I supposed to judge what the best use of a homeless person's money
>is, if I supposedly can't even figure out if they're homeless?
10 out of 10 :)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 12 Mar 2009 23:50:29 +0100, feet1st <nomail@nomail> wrote:
>
> Why don't you trust your government to KNOW which people are
> truely needy and allocate appropriate money to provide enough
> food for them?
Why don't you trust your government to KNOW which research projects are
truly worthwhile and allocate appropriate money to provide enough
resources for them?
--
FE
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
