|
tarepanda posted:The air here gets really dry sometimes and causes the inside of my nose to crack and I get periodic nosebleeds. This is especially bad in allergy season. Is there a better way to manage this than periodically rubbing vaseline along the inside of my nose?  ) applied (very, very carefully) with a sterile Q-tip or a kleenex wrapped around your finger is better than same applied with an unwrapped finger because the inside of your nostrils is already susceptible to hosting staph bacteria, which are on your fingers, and rubbing it into your nostrils with your fingers, you may be importing even more staph bacteria and making the problem worse.Put the ointment just up inside your nostrils (please don't jam a Q-tip halfway up to your brain and then tell the ER doctors that "the Internet told me to do it!" ) and make sure you get some on your nasal septum, which is the divider there.I have found that when I used to push my finger further up into my nose, like more than halfway up, like to where the really sensitive part begins, I had a lot more trouble with stuffiness, etc. This is because those delicate mucous membranes further up are easily irritated and inflamed, so I was actually compounding the problem. When I started just dabbing some on the inside of my nostrils, like where a nose stud would go, things were much better. By the same token, when you're blowing your nose in allergy season (also a personal issue here), don't root around higher up in your nostrils, attempting to get all the last bits of snot out, because, again, you'll just irritate those delicate mucous membranes. I put up with a certain amount of snot in August and September in the interests of long-term care. You can also get an assortment of saline nasal sprays, gels, and drops. You lie down on a bed or sofa on your back with your head hanging over the edge, and allow the drops/spray/gel to go in and run down the back of your throat and yes, it will make you cough, that's how you know it's in there. This may be difficult to do at work, though. There are recipes on the Internet for how to make your own (much cheaper) saline nose drops. Be aware that topical medicaments (i.e. antibiotic ointment, Vaseline, Vicks) can be contaminated by staph bacteria, so don't re-dip your snotty finger into your mega-tub of Vaseline. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2130167/ Fig Newton fucked around with this message at 16:37 on Apr 11, 2011 |
#
?
Apr 11, 2011 16:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 02:55 |
|
|
I need to move files from a MAC onto an external hard drive that has been used with windows computers (and will be used with windows in the future) I plug the hd into the mac, and it says its read-only. How can i move these files onto the drive without: 1. deleting any of the info on the drive 2. making it unusable for windows any help is appreciated!
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2011 16:42
|
|
|
Huntersoninski posted:I need to move files from a MAC onto an external hard drive that has been used with windows computers (and will be used with windows in the future) Number 1 might be a little tricky, but I'm guessing this is because the disk is formatted NTFS. If you format it as FAT32 it will be readable and writable on both Mac and Windows.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2011 16:57
|
|
|
Huntersoninski posted:I need to move files from a MAC onto an external hard drive that has been used with windows computers (and will be used with windows in the future) If none of the files are bigger than about 4 gigs, you could put them on a drive formatted to FAT32, but that's the only file system I know of that both Mac and Windows reads and writes to without an outside program (i.e. MacDrive for Windows that lets you use the Mac HFS+ file system). All the thumb drives I've ever used were FAT32, but if you want to use that one drive specifically, you either have to find a program for Mac that allows you to write to NTFS, or create a FAT32 partition on that drive.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2011 17:04
|
|
|
My wrists are ludicrously small and I'm tired of having a giant tail hanging off of my watch, so I want to get the strap shortened. Should I take it to a watch repair place? Or a different kind of leather handler, like shoe repair?
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2011 17:20
|
|
|
tarepanda posted:You can ship it via freight, takes a while (4-6 weeks IIRC?) and is the cheapest that I know of. What service would you recommend for this?
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2011 19:01
|
|
|
I am looking for a guide on how to attach a facecage to a Schutt DNA football helmet. Can I find one? Can I bollocks. It's the stock facecage, but I can't find a guide anywhere. Can anyone help?
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2011 19:06
|
|
|
GenoCanSing posted:I'm trying like hell to remember this one person I found one day hitting random on wikipedia. Here's what I can remember: Could it have been GG Allin?
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2011 19:07
|
|
|
haveblue posted:Number 1 might be a little tricky, but I'm guessing this is because the disk is formatted NTFS. If you format it as FAT32 it will be readable and writable on both Mac and Windows. CaptainViolence posted:My understanding of the situation (which I've dealt with before) is thus, though somebody feel free to correct me if I'm wrong: Thank you both for the help! Ultimately some harder Googling got me the answer in the form of some useful freeware. For anyone else with this issue, the programs MacFUSE and NTFS-3g were all I needed to get the issue sorted. Thanks again for the speedy replies, hope all this helps someone in the future.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2011 22:17
|
|
|
Melicious posted:My wrists are ludicrously small and I'm tired of having a giant tail hanging off of my watch, so I want to get the strap shortened. Should I take it to a watch repair place? Or a different kind of leather handler, like shoe repair? A shoe repair shop won't be able to help you. Just cut it off yourself with a pair of scissors; that's all the shoe repair guy would do, shrugging, and then charge you $20. Or buy a stretchy metal link watchband and take it to a jeweler and have him remove enough links to make it fit. Cutting it yourself with scissors is cheaper. Here's how. http://www.ehow.com/how_6058520_make-watch-strap-smaller.html
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2011 22:36
|
|
|
Fig Newton posted:A shoe repair shop won't be able to help you. Just cut it off yourself with a pair of scissors; that's all the shoe repair guy would do, shrugging, and then charge you $20. Or buy a stretchy metal link watchband and take it to a jeweler and have him remove enough links to make it fit. That's terrible advice unless I want my watch to look like poo poo. I highly doubt a cobbler is going to just chop up a watch band while shrugging considering they work with leather all day. People don't just take shoes to shoe repair- they also take purses and other leather goods there.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2011 23:26
|
|
|
Melicious posted:My wrists are ludicrously small and I'm tired of having a giant tail hanging off of my watch, so I want to get the strap shortened. Should I take it to a watch repair place? Or a different kind of leather handler, like shoe repair? http://www.thewatchprince.com/watch-band/Short-Length-Watch-Straps Buy a replacement shorter watch strap. It'll look nicer and doesn't cost too much.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2011 00:46
|
|
|
Fig Newton posted:Lots of advice But why all the focus on antibiotics and staph? It's not infected or anything and I'd rather not use antibiotics when I don't need them. It's not like I'm jamming in my entire distal phalange either and it blows my mind that people would. Fig Newton posted:By the same token, when you're blowing your nose in allergy season (also a personal issue here), don't root around higher up in your nostrils, attempting to get all the last bits of snot out Wut. Do people seriously "root around" after blowing their noses? Flashing Twelve posted:What service would you recommend for this? I've never used anything personally, sorry; I just know that friends have shipped their things to/from Australia/Japan/America/Canada when moving internationally.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2011 01:08
|
|
|
INTJ Mastermind posted:http://www.thewatchprince.com/watch-band/Short-Length-Watch-Straps Depends. The 2 long leather pieces on my watch are connected with a 3rd piece behind the watch. You can't really replace that band and it look as good. If he has the 2 seperate piece style band, replacing it is the easiest option. If he has to or wants to cut the excess off it's not a big deal if it isn't bordered with a thread. He should make a visible mark of where he wants to cut and cut it with a straight edge and not scissors. If it has a thread border, good luck. Don't know how to make that look visually good. I don't know if the thread will start to unravel or not. He could cut it pretty square with rounded corners and run a small thread with a sewing machine over it maybe?
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2011 01:12
|
|
|
cosmicjim, is it a deployment-style strap? If so, those are relatively easy to resize. Honestly, depending on the type of watch it is (a 10-dollar wal-mart watch, a fashion watch, a mid-range watch, high-end, etc.), there are different ways to deal with the strap. You might as well take it to a jewelry shop and see what they have to say about it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2011 01:25
|
|
|
There's stitching and rivets involved, not to mention the fact that the band is distinctive and part of the reason I like the watch... so yeah, not gonna buy another band, and not gonna gently caress with it myself. Guess I'll bring it to the jeweler.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2011 04:06
|
|
|
Melicious posted:There's stitching and rivets involved, not to mention the fact that the band is distinctive and part of the reason I like the watch... so yeah, not gonna buy another band, and not gonna gently caress with it myself. Guess I'll bring it to the jeweler. What brand/model is it? Out of curiosity. It might help since we can find a picture of it on the net.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2011 04:15
|
|
|
cosmicjim posted:What brand/model is it? Out of curiosity. It might help since we can find a picture of it on the net. It's a La Mer watch, a double wrap, but in a custom color/face. I had hoped that since my wrists were so small, I'd be able to just wrap it a third time, but it's 1/4" too short for a third go-around. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2011 04:38
|
|
|
tarepanda posted:Wut. Do people seriously "root around" after blowing their noses? Don't you?
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2011 04:39
|
|
|
stubblyhead posted:Don't you? No more than I stick my fingers up my rear end in a top hat to pull out any last bits of poop after I wipe. I just want to clear my nose, not scrub it within an inch of its life.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2011 04:40
|
|
|
Kind of an odd one, but this one's for any science-fiction fans: One of the main differences between Star Wars and Star Trek is that Star Trek actually tries to use legitimate science sometimes. Star Wars just doesn't give a gently caress, and is more of a fantasy. But Star Trek does, quite often, willingly make science blunders for the sake of the story or aesthetic. For example: all the different ships and stations. There's no reason for them to take the form they do, there's nothing really practical about the shape of the Enterprise, or DS9, or a bird of prey or whatever, they just look the way they do because the designers thought they'd look cool. Function follows forms as they later may toss in an explanation or two why one thing is however it is, but if you were an actual engineer who was handed a warp engine, you would never design any of those ships. So my question is, can anyone point me towards any science fiction shows, movies games or books where the science always comes before the fiction? Preferably something that is also entertaining. Stuff like Gattaca, Contact and Sunshine have their merits, but they're also near-future scenarios, I'm hoping for something that's way further out. For instance, have any authors really taken great care in crafting an alien world? 99% of the time you just get humanoid aliens, and if their flora and fauna are described at all, it's usually just a variation on Earth life. They get so caught up in describing alien cultures, they barely touch on their biology, and if they do then they exhibit no understanding of the evolution that would be required to create the lifeforms they describe. So, maybe I'm asking too much, but I'd like to hear some titles if anyone can think of any.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2011 05:04
|
|
|
Alien, 2001: A Space Odyssey, Moon, Blade Runner, maybe Solaris. Avatar in particular stands out because James Cameron put a lot of thought into the world/fauna. No space and more speculative, but maybe you'd consider Children of Men, Andromeda Strain, and 28 Days Later "hard." You'll be hard-pressed to find hard science fiction movies because the visual aesthetic is usually primary in, well, visual media. Even the Battlestar Galactica remake, which really did a great job in going for actual science and mechanics, gave in on a few points just to make the spectacle stand out. As far as books, pretty much anything by Clarke, Heinlein, Dick, Asimov, Baxter, Benford... Egan. It's a lot easier to go "hard" science in a book.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2011 05:12
|
|
|
tarepanda posted:Alien, 2001: A Space Odyssey, Moon, Blade Runner, maybe Solaris. Avatar in particular stands out because James Cameron put a lot of thought into the world/fauna. I've been thinking about this while in the shower- it's a good question. You've named all the ones that I could think of - I can only add the first Matrix as a possible choice as it does have a consistenty to the 'science' As for books: again, I agree with your list, and I would add William Gibson and Ian M. Banks to it. spog fucked around with this message at 05:49 on Apr 12, 2011 |
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2011 05:32
|
|
|
tarepanda posted:James Cameron put a lot of thought into the world/fauna. Except the Na'vi themselves stick out like a sore thumb from the rest of the animal life because they have literally nothing in common 
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2011 05:35
|
|
|
spog posted:As for books: again, I agree with your list, and I would add William Gibson and Stephen M. Banks to it. Gibson, definitely, though he can sometimes go into science fantasy territory. What would you recommend by Stephen M. Banks? I've either never heard of him or his name has completely slipped my memory. Mak0rz posted:Except the Na'vi themselves stick out like a sore thumb from the rest of the animal life because they have literally nothing in common Visual concerns, again. It wouldn't have been as cool or practical to have avatars modeled after actors if they hadn't been vaguely humanoid.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2011 05:35
|
|
|
tarepanda posted:Visual concerns, again. It wouldn't have been as cool or practical to have avatars modeled after actors if they hadn't been vaguely humanoid. Though they both give in to the standard of the humanoid alien, Avatar is pretty much the polar opposite of District 9. Avatar does everything it can to make the Na'vi cool and actractive, while District 9 makes the aliens as offensive as possible to challenge the audiences more to care about them. As for the authors, I know of most of them and have read a few of their books between them, but they've each authored dozens. Any particular stand outs for well thought out speculations? At the moment, I'm reading Nightfall by Asimov and Silverberg. The plot centers around a planet that is in constant daylight thanks to being surrounded by 6 stars. Every 2000 years they undergo a massive (total?) solar eclipse thanks to a satellite they can't normally see aligning with a day when one hemisphere faces only one star. For the life of me, I can make no sense of what this system looks like. Given that 99% of the book deals with the ramifications of this event on the people, I wish the 1% of explanation had been a little clearer. Elijya fucked around with this message at 05:59 on Apr 12, 2011 |
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2011 05:48
|
|
|
tarepanda posted:Gibson, definitely, though he can sometimes go into science fantasy territory. Gibson's modern day stuff isn't much cop - Pattern Recognition was pretty awful Ian M Banks (sorry for the brainfart) I'd say all of his science fiction stuff is worth reading and I would do it in date order http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iain_Banks Just skip Feersum Endjin (he writes phonetically, for style, and it makes it hard to read) As for TV series: how about the first couple of series of The X-Files?
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2011 05:52
|
|
|
tarepanda posted:No more than I stick my fingers up my rear end in a top hat to pull out any last bits of poop after I wipe. You mean... you don't do that either?
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2011 06:14
|
|
|
Elijya posted:So my question is, can anyone point me towards any science fiction shows, movies games or books where the science always comes before the fiction? Preferably something that is also entertaining. Stuff like Gattaca, Contact and Sunshine have their merits, but they're also near-future scenarios, I'm hoping for something that's way further out You can only have science come before the fiction if you keep it near future. If you set yourself for thousands of years out, you have no idea what science will be capable of (In 1931 the New York Times commissioned a bunch of experts to predict what 2011 would be like, as part of their 80th year of publishing. The more conservative guessers stated we might live to 70 years commonly, but didn't predict elimination of small pox. More far fetched predictors stated everyone would rely on vaccuum tubes and that the world would be a singular one world government neither true. Noone predicted anything close to the internet or the eradication of smallpox or men in space. And this is just looking 80 years ahead.) So when you look for stuff that tries to keep mind of science, it's always relatively near future.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2011 06:20
|
|
|
I wasn't sure exactly which sub-forum to put this in (perhaps SAP would have been better?), but I'm looking for a website with quizzes or collections of questions/exercises to do with grammar. Google tells me there are more than a few of them out there, and some will certainly be better than others. I want to cover things like nouns, verbs, adjectives, adverbs, pronouns, prepositions, conjunctions, determiners, punctuation and parsing. I already have a book to teach the stuff, but need practice. Does anyone favour any particular website? Note: I'm from NZ, which leans more towards English English, if that makes much of a difference in anything but spelling.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2011 06:31
|
|
|
Seeing as I'm moving soon from Oregon to Oklahoma, the obvious question I need to ask is what the ladies down there generally think of the sexy PacNW accent. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2011 07:08
|
|
|
Read William Gibson's Neuromancer and you'll realize the Matrix was not original at all. I think the search for accurate science movies deeper into the future than something like Gattica is pretty futile, because... #1, the future changes more slowly than we think it will. I have not seen a movie about the near future that was not overly futuristic when the setting date arrives in real life. #2, We tend to make fiction a reality. It fuels our ideas. What might seemed far fetched at the time suddenly becomes a goal for some people that very commonly is actually achieved eventually. Also, I don't think complaints about the shape of spaceships are valid concerns. We design what we are comfortable with. Our flying machines have been mostly based on birds. So it's not a stretch to me that future space vessels could have similarities. Especially by at least a few alien races. The layout of the Enterprise might be fictionally designed with safety in mind. The engines are held out from the ship and the bridge also detaches. The borg was a cube to reflect the precise no frills calculations of intelligent machinery. Wanting something scientifically accurate plus something so far ahead in the future we can't conceive seems illogical. Feel free to correct any incorrect Star Trek statements. These are assumptions based on watching a few episodes of ST:tng and playing a few Star Trek games.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2011 07:20
|
|
|
cosmicjim posted:#1, the future changes more slowly than we think it will. I have not seen a movie about the near future that was not overly futuristic when the setting date arrives in real life. It also changes faster than we think. The year 2001 in 2001 had moon colonies, but it also still had Pan-Am and the Soviets and lacks the internet, cell phones, cable/satellite TV, tons of things in 2001 in real life.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2011 07:28
|
|
|
cosmicjim posted:Read William Gibson's Neuromancer and you'll realize the Matrix was not original at all. Technology doesn't necessarily advance more slowly than we think, just in different ways. I just finished a book from I think the 80s that predicted cell phones (which were around then in limited form) becoming common but not the demise of the tape deck. And I read a book before that that predicted highly advanced computers that still had to be fed with punch cards. People tend to focus on the big things (flying cars and whatnot) but not so much the smaller, more day-to-day advances in technology that have more of an effect. I mean, who predicted even 20 years ago that mobile phones would be as multipurpose and advanced as they are now?
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2011 07:29
|
|
|
Just because we make some details archaic in these futuristic movies such as punch cards doesn't mean that as a whole they aren't overly futuristic. But yes I understand what you are saying. It still ties together with how futile the desire for scientifically accurate FUTURISTIC scifi is.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2011 07:41
|
|
|
Or how we strive for futuristic-icity in just incrementally upgrading technologies -- replacing computers with smaller computers or punch cards with aluminum punch cards or cars with flying cars.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2011 07:47
|
|
|
Florida Betty posted:I mean, who predicted even 20 years ago that mobile phones would be as multipurpose and advanced as they are now? Plenty of people, I think. ST: TNG had a hand held device that could scan any object or organism and feed back what must have been mountains of information instantaneously. What Star Trek got wrong was divvying up different tasks to different devices, but this was one of those aesthetic choices so that actors had a variety of props. What we've done is made devices which basically can, or soon will, do just about everything. But there's precedence for this too. Futurama's only 12 years old, but just take a look at Leela's wrist-mounted "do anything" device. That's not too much more than your standard smart-phone these days, making it probably pretty archaic for 1,000 years into the future (didn't one of the recent Futurama episodes actually deal with cell phones?) What didn't make sense was why everyone didn't have one. Or why the whole device hadn't been shrunk down to a few microns and inserted directly into everyone's cerebral cortex.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2011 08:19
|
|
|
I'd hardly look at Futurama as sci-fi since it's more of a satire with the future as a mask to keep us from wincing too much.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2011 08:23
|
|
|
Why is there an entire week of featured wikipedia articles (april 5th-april 12th) that start with the letter P? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Today%27s_featured_article/April_2011
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2011 10:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 02:55 |
|
|
Does anyone know of a site where I can make customizable non-digital cards? In this case for a wedding. My friend is getting hitched and I want to make him a card that has a really idiotic picture to show how disappointed I am in his decision. Preferably one that will format the image for you as I know nothing about that stuff.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2011 10:35
|
|