Miscellaneous desk
< September 6	<< Aug \| September \| Oct >>	September 8 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Miscellaneous Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

September 7

News on Intel Atom tablets

Has there been any news about potential Intel Atom tablets running something other Windows, and that also do not use a BIOS (like the bootloader-centric initialization on phones and other tablets)? --Melab±1 ☎ 00:14, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You might get a better response at the Computing Reference Desk... Dismas|^(talk) 00:19, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't seem to be much, if anything, in the shops yet, despite a lot of talk.[1][2] ViewSonic is one company with a prototype.[3] ViewSonic's laptops use special software to run Android from Windows, so they presumably have a BIOS to launch Windows, although it's a bit unclear from articles exactly how it works. --Colapeninsula (talk) 08:34, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Movie title I can't remember

There was this movie I watched maybe 7 or 8 years back... A guy tries to investigate people falling ill, or getting paralysed.. And then realises that somebody or some company, is actually running tests on these people, turning them into guinea pigs for a new drug.. And I remember there being numerous references to C6 or C12.. Something to do with the cones in the spine. The drug the made paralyses the spine, and makes the victim totally helpless.. And in the end, the "hero", the protagonist, wakes up and finds himself on a hospital bed, unable to move, implying that the bad guys got him too, and injected that drug into his body. Anybody know which movie this is? Thanks a bunch in advance 117.97.194.133 (talk) 06:52, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Could be Extreme Measures with Hugh Grant and Gene Hackman. DuncanHill (talk) 06:58, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Licensed Retail Industry

What are the main challenges facing the Licensed Retail Industry in Britain over the next decade? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prm502 (talk • contribs) 10:22, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a particular country in mind? I don't see many prospects in Saudi Arabia, for instance. --Colapeninsula (talk) 11:50, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Lest people think Cola has reading comprehension issues, Prm502 added "in Britain" after Cola's question. As to the original question:

Please do your own homework.

Welcome to Wikipedia. Your question appears to be a homework question. I apologize if this is a misinterpretation, but it is our aim here not to do people's homework for them, but to merely aid them in doing it themselves. Letting someone else do your homework does not help you learn nearly as much as doing it yourself. Please attempt to solve the problem or answer the question yourself first. If you need help with a specific part of your homework, feel free to tell us where you are stuck and ask for help. If you need help grasping the concept of a problem, by all means let us know.. --LarryMac | Talk 12:03, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Adding phtots to the 'Mussel' listing on Wikipedia

Hi there, I am a representative of the Mussel Industry Council of North America and we were wondering if we would be able to add some recipe shots to the "Mussel" listing on Wikipedia? We have lots of great recipe photos and I can't seem to find an area where I am able to upload them. Is this possible or no?

Please respond Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Discovermussels (talk • contribs) 14:12, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'll respond here -- you are absolutely welcome to upload your images at Wikimedia Commons (http://commons.wikimedia.org), if you are willing and able to license them as required (meaning using the right kind of Creative Commons license). Once they are at Commons, they can be used in articles here. Looie496 (talk) 15:00, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

However you may or may not have noticed that your (frankly commercially sounding) account has been blocked. Can't think why. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Richard Avery (talk • contribs) 22:00, 7 September 2011

Yes it was an unnecessary and negative comment. It seemed to me the company was attempting some covert advertising. Apologies for my cynicism and insensitivity. Richard Avery (talk) 14:00, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. Someone asks if they can donate some images. You bite them, as if they should have known a priori that we have a problem with organisation names as user names. Good work. I've responded to the OP via email, and hope your ugly snark does not put them off. --Tagishsimon (talk) 22:48, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

electrical

town power failure. Can a 7000 watt generator with 220 outlet can be used to run a electical line to home clothes dryer outlet to partly power home? Main elect. panel breaker turned off. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.169.24.209 (talk) 15:28, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

We don't want to give you advice about things that could kill you if we are mistaken -- we are not qualified to do so. Looie496 (talk) 16:11, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

... but we can assure you that the dryer is likely to be only about 3000 watts. See the plate on the rear to check. We should also warn you that it is not a good idea to connect the generator in any way to the panels on your power supply. Dbfirs 00:39, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The breaker or fuse on the dryer circuit would have to be large enough, and the conductors from the panel to the dryer outlet to the panel would have to be large enough, to carry the output of the generator. 7000 watts, single phase, at 220 volts would imply 31 amp. The generator would be overloaded if more than that amount was drawn from the branch circuits in the house. I would be concerned that someone might turn on the main breaker, so I would find a way to mechanically lock it out from being closed. Closing the breaker while the generator was running might electrocute utility personnel, or might cause the generator to fail dramatically. There are many dangers from running a generator in the way described, so I advise against it. An approved throwover switch is a better option, and the described method would be contrary to various electrical safety codes. Edison (talk) 02:06, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I didn't read this as a 7000 watt generator designed for direct connection to a high-power industrial dryer because the OP wrote "home clothes dryer outlet" (but I suppose 31a is a possibility). A normal home dryer would need only a 15a breaker unless the generator was being connected to run the home "in reverse" from the outlet, and in this case the OP should advised that the wiring would cope only if the outlet is on a "ring main". Edison's suggestion of a 31 amp throwover switch (or 100a for full household use) is good advice, but this should be installed by a qualified electrician with the approval of the electricity supply company. Just running the dryer and other appliances direct from the generator without using household wiring would be fine, and much safer, though I'd include a 15a fuse or breaker for protection on each circuit. Dbfirs 07:50, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The short answer would be that it extremely dangerous, and possibly illegal, as you are energizing house wiring without a transfer/throwover switch between the generator and the grid, thus exposing electrical linemen to possible shock as your house backfeeds the grid. Better to plug in the refrigerator and a few lights via extension cord or a made extension using 12-ga cable rather than courting that risk. Acroterion (talk) 18:33, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Also extremely dangerous would be the output from your generator connected to a plug with live pins, instead of a socket. Dbfirs 15:36, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Negativity

I have a boss who is not professionally sound, due to which he tries to undermine my work by constantly saying, " Nothing is happening".Whatever work I do is neither appreciated nor revealed to any body outside my department. He passes off all work as his own despite no notable contribution from him. As a result, I am getting frustrated and due to which, a lot of negativity is creeping in me. It has made me critical of the organization I am serving in and have become cynical in my attitude. How do I get out of this mindset? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 120.59.55.190 (talk) 16:56, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You may want to consult a trained therapist on this matter. A good piece of advice I once got was Aversion therapy, e.g. snapping a rubber band on one's wrist when one thinks negative thoughts. Schyler (exquirere bonum ipsum) 17:33, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is a well phrased and worded question. Do you compose it yourself or copy it from a self help book?--Aspro (talk) 17:45, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That is an odd thing to ask. It does not look at all like something from a self-help book to me. Marco polo (talk) 18:18, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Frankly, the practice of taking credit for the accomplishments of subordinates is typical of middle managers, in my experience. I'm afraid that you just have to get used to it. If you have contact with people outside your department and want them to know about your work, you might look for opportunities to take credit for your work by saying (out of earshot of your boss) something like "I was the one who actually did X", where X is the critical part of the work, such that you don't explicitly contradict your boss's claim of credit for the work as a whole. As for your boss's comment that "Nothing is happening," you might try responding something like "I'm really sorry that you aren't satisfied with my work. How can I improve it?" After he responds, say, "I promise to do my best." It may be that you do need to change something to satisfy your boss. If it is just that he expects more than is humanly possible, just assure him that you will do your best, and let him know, regretfully, when you are unable to meet his unreasonable demands. Another good trick is to ask him to prioritize. Say, "I am working as hard as I am able, but, realistically, I can't finish both A and B by the end of the day (week/month/whatever). Which would you prefer me to finish?" Sadly, many bosses have been promoted above their level of competence, and it is the job of many subordinates, subtly and covertly, to manage their bosses. If you can just accept that that's the way things are and not make value judgments about it, you may have an easier time at work. Also, try to bring a sense of humor to the situation. It can be ridiculous and kind of amusing to have to manage one's boss, after all. If none of this resolves the problem and your boss is really hostile, then the best course may be to look for a different job. Marco polo (talk) 18:18, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep the mindset. It might motivate you to look for a better job. thx1138 (talk) 19:48, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ahh yes. Another victim of the Peter Principal. Googlemeister (talk) 19:50, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ah yes, but that would be the head of a school or a legal firm who has the name Peter. What you mean is the Peter Principle. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 02:41, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'd ask for a transfer to another department. If they refuse, I'd look for another job. StuRat (talk) 02:51, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Cheap memorable days out (or gifts) for couples

Does anyone have any advice for good days out, or gifts, which can be done on a small budget? Specifically, what do people find of doing "romantic", "never forget" for less, say, under £80 / $130 total? Thanks, 92.8.181.91 (talk) 20:45, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's best not to actually do something together, but to just meet up for the sole purpose of being with each other. Meet in a park or square or whatever. I recently met up with a girlfriend in the grounds of a library. If you want something to eat/drink you can buy it, but you aren't distracted from each other by any shite.--92.251.204.141 (talk) 02:04, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

How about if you rent a canoe for the day ? You didn't say how many people total, but 2 or 3 fit per canoe. And, of course, canoeing is even more enjoyable if you happen to have a river handy. :-) StuRat (talk) 02:32, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As for a memorable gift, a pet might fit the bill. Of course, you should never surprise someone with a pet, they should agree to it and choose the pet. Of course, on your budget you're not going to get a pet with "papers", but can get one from the pound. And, of course, the pet will cost thousands over it's life, so, if you include that, it's well beyond your budget. StuRat (talk) 02:45, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Protestations of undying love usually go down well. Inexpensive, and you can always change your mind ~~later~~ afterwards. For that bit of added romantic atmosphere, a tealight is cheap. ;-) Ghmyrtle (talk) 06:33, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Do something completely extraordinary, i. e. spend the day in the next town/village on an independent movies competition, walk around, come back in the evening, then go sightseeing in your own city in the night, i. e. running from a snowplow until morning. Tried it, works :) and is definitely under eighty pounds (never had any money like that when in my days at university). --Ouro (blah blah) 06:52, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Picnics are traditional, and relatively cheap, depending on your taste in picnic food. --Colapeninsula (talk) 13:42, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What better way to say "I love you" than a spatula. Some chicks or more into live theatre or things like that though. A lot of it depends on where you are, a nice view from a hilltop at sunset was one of my favorite moves during my single days. If wildflowers are in season, pick some. They're free and it shows that you did something yourself instead of just buying it at the store. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:36, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

noisest thing in the world?

could it be a windfan? --Kronkfan (talk) 23:39, 7 September 2011 (UTC) This is not a joke question either.[reply]

Natural or manmade? Decibel level or annoyance factor? He iro 23:54, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If we're taking annoyance factor that would have to be my ex wife. Beeblebrox (talk) 00:01, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I was gonna go with screaming child at a restaurant, lol He iro 00:06, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. That phenomenon has been know to shatter glass. However, the 1883 eruption of Krakatoa was heard over 2,000 miles away. That's right much noisy. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:08, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

On a serious note, I was thinking the same thing, a volcanic explosion. He iro 00:14, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tornado or Hurricane? --Kronkfan (talk) 00:15, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Big Bang for both decibel level and annoyance level. It's responsible for that fuzzy charcoal on a "detuned" television.--92.251.204.141 (talk) 00:39, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Technically, the Big Bang is responsible for everything. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:46, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

But it wasn't "in the world". HiLo48 (talk) 03:42, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No, the world was "in it". However, given the vacuum of space, would the Big Bang actually have emitted any sound waves? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 11:45, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Probably it would have made a sound, as it was not a vacuum at the time of the Big Bang, and would have made enough noise to fill the entire universe (which, admittedly, was very very tiny at the time). Only problem really is, there was no-one there to hear it. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 12:05, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

An atheist philosopher would probably argue that the Big Bang was utterly silent. Whilst presumably another atheist philospher would probably argue that Big Bang wasn't silent at all and that's a foolish notion. While the theist philosopher sat there relieved he didn't need to join in all the arguing today. --Dweller (talk) 12:11, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No he or she would not. The big bang has a huge effect on our lives. That question can only apply to things that will never interact with us ever.--92.251.140.251 (talk) 12:16, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Really? That's quite a dogmatic response. ^{[citation needed]} --Dweller (talk) 12:52, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand why you're calling Bishop Berkeley an atheist. Card Zero (talk) 17:24, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Another odd response. Bishop Berkeley (whom no-one has mentioned until now) would be sitting in the theist corner - as God was able to hear Big Bang or there wasn't a Big Bang, the question for theists is inherently invalid. --Dweller (talk) 16:04, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bishop Berkeley, of course, asked the question (about trees rather than the big bang, but it's the same difference). You say that as a theist he would think his question invalid, and that only atheists would argue about it. Card Zero (talk) 17:23, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think many theists commonly dispute that trees fall in forests but a number do dispute the big bang. If you consider the big bang never happened, it seems possible you'd consider the question of whether it made any noise meaningless. What Bishop Berkeley would have thought of the Big Bang we will never know.Nil Einne (talk) 17:34, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

For animals: the sperm whale (236 db). Close contenders are the tiny pistol shrimps (218 db), which actually use 'sonic waves' to stun/kill prey.-- Obsidi♠n Soul 01:12, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Decibel ratings for "tiny pistol shrimp" do not specify how far away the sound was measured, or how long it lasted. If I put an iron bucket over your head and hit it with a hammer, it might be louder as measured at your ear. A riveting gun as heard inside a boiler was quite loud, producing deafness among boilermakers. Various types of gunfire are extremely noisy closeby. A Saturn V launch produced 180 dB at 150 feet ("Human information processing," 1971, Peter Lindsay and Donald Norman, page 224). Atomic bombs and hydrogen bombs were also quite loud, if one were close enough. The Tunguska event was likely quite loud. A 300-or-more piece brass band rehearsing in a bandroom is quite noisy to the musicians. Edison (talk) 01:50, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Er... didn't I explicitly mention only for animals? Heck sure, a Saturn V launch is louder and the actual sounds of pistol shrimps is audible to humans as a faint clicking due to their small size. But they can interfere with SONAR and study into them were actually initiated in WW2 because they were so loud they could hide enemy submarines.-- Obsidi♠n Soul 21:33, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The OP certainly did not restrict it to "animals." And you did not "explicitly" say "only for animals." BTW, some consider humans to be animals, so a person beating on something would be sounds created by animals, unlike volcanoes, asteroid impacts etc. I still wonder about the whale and shrimp claims, since no distance is specified. Edison (talk) 04:48, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I visited http://www.guinnessworldrecords.com/ and entered loudest in the search box and found 18 results.

—Wavelength (talk) 04:28, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The loudest currently unexplained noise could be the mysterious Bloop sound. -- œ ^™ 05:45, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's Chthulu, obviously! Adam Bishop (talk) 10:53, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Specifically, Cthulhu snoring!-- Obsidi♠n Soul 21:39, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Some earthquakes are surprisingly noisy, the 1929 Murchison earthquake could be heard 250 km away. Mikenorton (talk) 12:23, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

An impact the size of the Chicxulub impact is estimated to make a noise of 150-160 db at 100km and would likely be audible at every point on the planet. Googlemeister (talk) 13:21, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'd have to say a supernova might be the noisiest thing around...except that there is no way to hear it since space is airless. Reaper Eternal (talk) 17:58, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The question is noisiest thing in the world, not the universe. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:10, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The word world has various meanings.

—Wavelength (talk) 18:21, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Because you asked about a wind fan, you might be interested in this resource.

ACOUSTIC ECOLOGY | Special Report: Wind Energy Noise Impacts

—Wavelength (talk) 18:43, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In any case, no windfan ever created is louder then some other man made objects, like explosives detonations. Googlemeister (talk) 19:12, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]