text:
|2004-11-10, 13:42
|Link #1
Junior Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
A small survey - Suicide
I would be very grateful, if you could answer to this little survey about suicide. You can send answers through e-mail too (firstname.lastname@example.com).
1. Age/Gender
2. Have you ever considered about attempting a suicide?
a) Yes b) No c) I have thought about it, but it wasn't very serious
2b. Only answer to this question if you answered yes, a) in the previous question.
Did your suicide thoughts include serious depression?
a) Yes b) No
2c. Only answer to this question if you answered yes a) in question 2.
Did you think about attempting a suicide in the last 6 months?
a) Yes b) No
3. Do you think suicide is acceptable?
a) Yes, everyone decides of their own life. b) No. Never. c) If there are good reasons behind it, etc. religious or ethic reasons. Note: Euthanasia isn't included in these reasons, or in this whole survey.
4. Has someone you knew well, ever done a suicide?
|2004-11-10, 13:56
|Link #3
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Antwerp area, Belgium, Europa
Age: 42
yes I've thought about just like 99% of the western wolrd population I think, and yes I've had my share of suicides in my immediate surroundings, both succesfull and failed attempts
Last edited by 7thMethuselah; 2004-11-19 at 10:24.
|2004-11-10, 14:01
|Link #4
Disabled By Request
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Land of Chibi
Age: 31
1. female
2. yes
2b. no
2c. no
3. i cant answer this ... it was a irrational mistake at the time to prove my mum wrong and that i can do it .... regret later ..
4. nope
i taje this subject so seriously, whenever i look at what i did to myself ... it reminds me of that arguement and plus it doesnt look pleasant and i often try to hide it now anyway ... come to think of it, im embarassed of myself for even doing it .
|2004-11-10, 14:56
|Link #5
~Lost in the Moonlight~
1. 31/Female
2. A= Yes
2B. A=Yes
2C. B=No
3. Cannot answer that as My perspective has changed over the years
4. Yes they have and they succeeded.
|2004-11-10, 15:27
|Link #8
I've done suicide before. One friend does it, then another, you figure "Well, if they're doing it, I should." After that, it's hanging out in goth ridden bars, listening to shitty music by some guy who calls himself Marilyn, and not breathing.
Kinda sucks.
I suggest you just skip the whole craze and go straight to posting on live journal.
|2004-11-10, 15:38
|Link #9
Team Player
Join Date: Apr 2004
1) 24/Male
2) No
3) No, although I should mention that I respect anyone's right to make this decision. I just don't approve.
4) Possibly, some of them are just the type. I only have one friend that was kind enough to relate the story of his failed suicide attempt, and ever since I have teased him incessantly whenever the subject arises. Aside from the cheap thrill, I'm going for a kind of Pavlovian effect. I figure, the next time he gets it in his head to try something that stupid, he might think "If I screw it up again, I'll never, ever hear the end of it." It may not be sensitive, but I think he has a thicker skin now than he used to.
|2004-11-10, 15:46
|Link #11
Disabled By Request
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Land of Chibi
Age: 31
remind me to never live where you live!!!!
*EDIT* i think i gto into a big argument with mum and you know when parents just go ... yea go on then, like i care .. or you havent got the guts kind of thing .... well i endured all these comments from past arguemtns i mean we argue like 4 times a week minimum ... its better now
but one day we got into a fight about why i was getting bad grades at school and she blamed everything on the laptop .... first it was, if i came home early it was because i wanted to play on the laptop, next it was, if i was home on a weekend it was because of my obsession of going onlien and playing games and watching anime....
fight after fight we argued about the laptop until i finally decided to do somethign about it, i went out mroe often and GUESS WHAT, i go out TOO much ...
so then one day, i got a knife from the kitchen and said "fine, if you dont like the laptop so much, i'll break it" .. she said go on then .... i drove the knife through the keyboard (didnt do much damage cos i didnt want to break it really, just to scare her) .... and then she ran and took the laptop as if she didnt want me to. of course ic ould understand that it costs money and it was only said at the ehat of the arguement...
and then she started hurling abuse at me which i back chated pretty badly, she went through the move house phase, which was ok cos that came up in every argument, not to mention how many times she disowned me
but then she just said, i regret having you ... something about my father forced her to have it then the marriage didnt work out and they divorced in 2 years.. she claimed that if she could of, she would of aborted me, which kinda hurt ...
picked up the knife again and said fine, i'll die in front of you (insane moment) and she said, "do it" ...
done it on my right wrist only about 3 - 4mm deep, i was close to cutting that tendon thing that moves my hand thingy ... but yeah, im glad i didnt go all the way ... it didnt hurt tho ... now i have a 2 inch scar there and im ashameed to have it
Last edited by Anita-chan; 2004-11-10 at 15:56.
|2004-11-10, 16:32
|Link #13
~Lost in the Moonlight~
|2004-11-10, 16:50
|Link #14
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Sweden, Basement
Age: 28
Yes, several times.
Depends on what you thing is serious depression, but I think so.
Yes, didn't 'cause if I would fail it would hurt alot and I would probably have to talk to a therapist or something, and that would just make my life worse so I decided that wishing and hoping that my life will get better in a few years is better.
Of course, it is an human right to decide over your own life. If someone (like me) wants to take suicide then let them!
Nothing, nothing is as much worth as freedom to be able to do what you want.
|2004-11-10, 18:49
|Link #15
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Kentucky
1) Male 23
2) Somewhere between A and C I guess.
2b) Dunno if I even believe in "serious depression", I mean if that's a condition than shouldn't the opposite be some sort of medical condition too? I'd certainly love to see some overly happy people medicated...
3) A. Victimless so I fail to see the problem with it.
4) No. Although this guy that roomed two dorm rooms down from me at my dorm during my freshman year shot himself one night. Me and my roommate actually slept through the whole thing... Actually I also had a cousin who said he was going to kill himself by jumping off a bridge, but the bridge wasn't even high enough to kill himself so I don't really count that.
|2004-11-10, 19:10
|Link #16
Aria Company
Join Date: Nov 2003
|2004-11-10, 19:47
|Link #18
|Thread Tools


text:
My daughter Emma, 17, and I had a convo the other day about how every vegetarian gets sick of the question, "How do you get your protein?" (I bet we hear from some of them here!)
I often point those asking that question to my report HERE called "Protein: Are We Deficient? Or Overdosing?"
A soccer teammate of Emma's props up her diet with endless protein shakes. Even vegans sometimes buy into the protein myth! And this teammate is not healthy. She eats lots of processed food, plus a processed protein powder mix. This is the logical fallacy:
"I know a vegetarian, and she's not healthy. Therefore we must need meat to be healthy."
Nearly every logical fallacy applies here. I love exposing logical fallacies but don't want to deliver a dissertation on all the ways that argument fails. My readers are smart, and you can poke holes in that kind of thinking yourself.
Most if not all our degenerative diseases are related to undigested proteins floating in our bloodstream. That's right, our EXCESSIVE PROTEIN consumption is killing us. We do NOT need 20% animal protein, thank you very much Dr. Robert Atkins! (It didn't work very well for him, did it?)
Those of you eating a mostly plant-based diet, what's your favorite response to that question, "Where do you get your protein?"

subset: commoncrawl


text:
This library [arstechnica.net] has a 3945 [cisco.com].
Somebody at Cisco must have made quite a bonus...
It's the same worldwide, when I worked in public sector in the UK some years back it was absolutely no different.
The companies know it too, which is why public sector contracts are seen as so lucrative most the time. This is also why I made the move to private sector, sure I miss my 38 days leave a year + 15 more through accrued flexi time and my final salary pension scheme, but ultimately I'm not working with the kind of idiots who are responsible for this sort of thing, and that's worth more than any amount of leave or pension (and besides, private sector career progression is more about talent, than how old you are, so it's been a good move career wise too anyway).
This isn't to say I'm some kind of right wing capitalist that Republican's love, on the contrary, I'm quite socialist in my views, but at the end of the day you can still give too much money to a particular public sector department, and this is exactly what happens when you do, and it's the same wherever you are in the world.
When I worked public sector, the first priorities weren't getting the best price or best value. They were, in order:
1) Buy it from a registered state contractor (most of which had ridiculously jacked-up prices)
[or, if a state contractor didn't have it]:
2) Find a state contractor and get a "quote" on it (translation: Have a registered state contractor buy it for you and then attach a hefty fee on top of what they paid, rather than buy it directly and save money)
Running a small PC repair shop in the 90's we wanted to be able to support the local schools as we felt we could easily provide better prices services than they where getting. But i can tell you that we also had to give them a much higher rate than normal because there contract agreements had some insane terms.
My personal favorite was that when publishing a product on the price-list we MUST guaranty availability at that price point for 7 years. At first i figured that you had to keep that price, but in the fine text it meant you had to keep replacement stock too. If say 6 years of it being on the list they wanted one and you didn't have it and could not provide it you where liable to replace all of there previous purchases for that component with a compatible component (at your expense) from the vendor list (either form your self or another vendor) and they where the ultimate decider on what was considered compatible. In the end we selected a very limited selection of what we normally offered and we did over charge a lot because we would basically have to ensure availability for 7 years, so we would put it out there marked up and watch the demand and then as the product got harder to stock we would stock pile them to the point we could ensure availability.
We made a lot of money, but so much money was wasted that it just isn't even funny. I still have some 3c905b's from way back in this mess. Personally i'm glad not to be dealing with that stuff anymore.
I don't see it as particularly a public/private difference, but a difference of well-run and poorly-run organizations. That might correlate, but I've seen plenty of examples on the opposite sides as well.
On the private-sector side: have you ever looked at how Enterprise procurement works? Cisco makes a ton of money doing exactly the same thing there. You find some Fortune 100 firm that has a lot of money but no clue about technology, and you recommend a ridiculously over-specced system, which they buy because nobody ever got fired for buying Cisco. Oracle makes their money doing that too.
And on the private-sector side: procurement in Scandinavia is much less of a mess than in the US and UK, which is why building the Copenhagen Metro cost less than 1/10 of the per-mile cost of most U.S. metro construction projects.
"I don't see it as particularly a public/private difference, but a difference of well-run and poorly-run organizations. That might correlate, but I've seen plenty of examples on the opposite sides as well."
Yes, this is absolutely true. The problem (at least here in the UK) is that public sector is almost universally bad because there is absolutely no accountability. In private sector, if you do a bad job, you eventually go bankrupt and lose your job, in public sector that never happens.
I'd be interested to know why public sector projects do work better in Scandinavia, is it because there is more accountability, or is it simply because they're not given so much money to work with? On a project that can be achieved with £1million for example, what should happen is:
Person 1) Here's £1million to go do x
Person 2) I can't do x with only £1million
Person 1) Okay, you're fired, we'll get someone who can
What actually happens is:
Person 1) Here's £1million to go do x
Person 2) I can't do x with only £1million
Person 1) Okay, here's £2million more
Or just outright:
Person 1) Here's £3million to go do x
Person 2) Okay
I do completely agree the problem isn't specific to public sector just because public sector is public sector, but because of the nature of public sector generally in that it tends not to be held to account or given enough incentive to do a good job (and by incentive, I mean, you get to keep your job if you don't do a shit job). Natural selection is inherent in private sector - those businesses or employees that do shit, go bankrupt or get fired, but it's not inherent in public sector due to the fact central government will just bail them out, and up taxes to cover the cost if need be. There it needs to be created artificially, and I don't think many governments do that.
This is also why the bank bailout may not have been particularly smart, but interestingly as a result of the bank bailout governments have created a lot more legislation to govern how they operate and what they can get away with precisely to create at least some of the necessary accountability artificially. Yet they wont do that with public sector even though it suffers the exact same problems - institutional incompetence fed by lack of accountability.
You missed the looping which is important, what happens is:
Person 1) Here's $3 million to go do X
Person 2) OK, I shall do it
[ time passes ]
Person 2) Ive finished, and I only spent $1 million, so here's $2 million back.
[ time passes]
Person 1) Here's $1 million to do do Y
Person 1) Here's $3 million to go do X
Person 2) OK, I shall do it
[ time passes ]
Person 2) We've run out of money but we are almost done.
Person 3) OK, here's another $1 million.
[ time passes]
Person 2) Ive finished.
[ time passes]
Person 1) Here's $4 million to do do Y
If you've worked in anywhere that sells to large businesses/government you will have seen the end of budget rush as departments rush orders to get billed before the end of the budget year so they can spend their allocated budget before they have to give anything left back and get less next round. It's always our busiest time of year.
This is actually one of my pet peeves in the UK too.
Local government budgets renew in April, it gets to December the busiest time of the year for traffic, and what do they do?
They blow all remaining budget on roadworks.
You know, rather than plan it throughout the year, doing a lot of it in the summer and so forth when the roads are quiet, they wait until commuters are already suffering the clusterfuck of Christmas shoppers and they then just screw it all up a bit more too by closing half the roads, lanes, a
In private sector, if you do a bad job, you eventually go bankrupt and lose your job
In theory and in the long-run, perhaps, but this can take a very long time, and may never happen if other things outweigh it. I have some second-hand experience with how things work in the oil industry, and procurement there is a mess in part because it really has only a marginal effect on the company's long-term survival, which depends almost entirely on a mixture of oil exploration on the one hand, and geopolitical factors like the price of oil and whether Russia is going to confiscate your mineral rights, on the other hand. Overpaying for Cisco routers is lost in the noise: if a company like Exxon is doing well, it can afford it, and if it's going to go bankrupt, it won't be because of Cisco routers.
Plus, you could always be "too big to fail".
If you are a large company that's richer than some small nations, you may find that the government won't let you fail regardless of how badly you screw up. If anything, they will bail you out and let you become even bigger (like AA).
Part of the issue is also that
1) Government jobs often don't pay as well as their private equivalents - so it's harder for them to keep good talent.
2) A lot of regulation (at least where I'm at) is against corruption, and not towards efficiency - No, it doesn't always prevent the former, that's virtually impossible, but there are times where the two are mutually exclusive unless the laws start to get convoluted.
Accountability in government is a bit harder. It's easy to show that you did your job correctly and by the letter, which makes it hard to get fired in public service since there are rules about how to fire someone. In the private world though you can do everything correctly by the book and it doesn't stop you from getting fired if someone higher up thinks you aren't effective.
You can buy the most expensive product as a public service employee and still be able to show that you followed the rules correctly
I don't see it as particularly a public/private difference, but a difference of well-run and poorly-run organizations.
Assuming that the private sector is always efficient is wrong, because anyone who's worked in large private sector companies knows full well that it's not. For example, most of the "management consulting" industry shouldn't really exist, because it's entire reason for existing is so that some manager Smith can hire an outside firm to tell their boss that Smith's plan is better than Jones' plan and thus secure Smith that promotion. One of the things that's becoming clear in corporate governance is that an employee of a corporation faced with making a decision that benefits themselves versus a decision that benefits the organization will pick themselves almost every time.
Assuming that the public sector is always inefficient is also wrong. There are public agencies that are ridiculously efficient at what they do. For example, the administrative overhead of Social Security is approximately 0.9%. The VA gets more bang for the health care buck than Medicaid, Medicare, and private medical insurance. The CFPB [consumerfinance.gov] is doing a pretty good job on a shoestring budget. The National Park Service costs about $3 billion a year, which sounds like a lot but is actually about $10 per American, and in return it serves 280 million visitors a year, which certainly seems like a pretty good value.
More to the point, assuming the public sector inherently sucks means we stop rewarding those public servants that do a really good job, which will reduce their motivation and pretty much guarantee that they'll do it badly. And assuming the private sector inherently is efficient means we stop holding private organizations accountable when they screw up. Doing either is really stupid.
and besides, private sector career progression is more about talent, than how old you are
Haha, good one!
Talent probably matters more than age in career progression, but it's commonly less important than politicking and nepotism.
But the Cisco salesman told them they absolutely needed a 3945, for future expansion and such!
I'm vaguely sympathetic to the desire to single-source and have something you can monitor with one tool, which would exclude the obvious 'just get a $50 router, FFS' option; but under any reasonable depreciation calculation scheme, it'd probably be cheaper to get an ASA 5505 now, and throw it away if you need something bigger in the future than it would be to get a 3945 now in case you end up gluing a second trailer to your first or something...
(and yes, I know that you are joking.)
It looks like this was a voip build out. So they specked a router supporting a variety of interfaces (old school T1 and ethernet bits) that did local voip processing with PSTN backup and switching with POE. Getting a POE switch, a voip PBX, and the right router would have been far cheaper and probably used less rack space. To do it all in one box in cisco land it's about the correct box.
No, the reason that the 3945s were recommended was because the state wanted routers with redundant power supplies, and the 3945 is the lowest model Cisco makes with redundant power...
They who wanted dual power supplies? I can see maybe some being used in some places like the State Police. But for all the small schools, too?
And a customer that doesn't know what they're buying? Say it ain't so!
Caveat emptor - get smarter buyers.
Competitive bidding and requirements development are cornerstones of all government procurement processes. I guess the WV procurement team needs a refresher course in doing that because if they'd gone to HP or any other provider they would have provided their hardware solution which could have demonstrated that what Cisco proposed was overblown. Nobody likes competitive bidding but it does help weed out these kinds of things.
What could be done is expecting Cisco to pay back the difference between what they got and what they should have got next time a contract comes up somewhere...they have to be $x cheaper than their rivals charge for the same spec kit. There has to be a price otherwise they won't change.
Many states and the federal government used to have rules that would fine your company if the profit exceeded 25%. The fine of a 26% profit margin was about 10%. At 27.5% the fine would break even with the profit. Maybe it is time to bring back those kinds of rules or enforce them when they are still in the law books.
It looks like the state wrote a RFP the specified cisco kit and specific cisco kit at that. It looks like they wanted a single box for routing, switching, wireless, secure voip with PSTN fallback, waas, and POE. Cisco charges a HUGE premium to put all that into a single box. The VOIP and WAAS are baby servers each and add the switch in you have filled the add in slots. Anyways this is not something to blame on cisco the IT guys picked a winner by what they specked and how they specked it. Having worked with government IT before it's easy to get stuck doing something stupid, case in point agency was looking to upgrade there 80's 56k frame relay bridged network. I came in as a sub, they had specified a cisco 7500 as the core for a upgrade to DS3's and that it be bridged. Well noting that they were an all IPX shop I recommended routing it took longer to get that change put into the contract and I had auditors questioning if I was trying to give them something lesser. They extended the project and had be connect up the locations via preexisting fiber they are paying 130k a month for DS3's to facilities they have dark fiber to. I had to fight to let the dark fiber be the primary routed path as they did not want to loose face with there 7500 DS3 5 year contract boondoggle, in the end they went from 56k frame to gige fiber with a 45mbs DS3 backup network. At the end of the day if you let the gov IT guys spec more than what they want to do they can easily start picking winners as far as manufacturers, in the case of that 7500 I'm very sure he wanted it as a resume point that he worked with them.
If you're hired as a consultant, you're supposedly being paid to attend to the interests of a client, and there is some level of complete disregard of those interests which should rise to the level of fraud.
It's still a bad situation for Cisco. I remember a similar story about them several months ago that happened in California. When a company builds a reputation for dishonesty and ripping off their customers, other potential customers will stop even considering them as an option. Even if this type of news doesn't get the same type of attention as the latest high-profile murder case, Cisco's competitors are paying attention and this will become a part of their sales pitch.
It's not illegal to be an unethical crook.
Crook - someone who has committed a c
"Not Performed Legally"?
"'legally unauthorized purchasing process"?
So, the opposite of legal... would be illegal.
Also: "Cisco showed a wanton indifference to the interests of the public"
Really, a profit driven company tried to fleece the public? I'm shocked, shocked like a man making toast in the bath!
In a decent world, this would get the company blacklisted for all government-funded future purchases for a certain time. Which would make company care a LOT about not fleecing the public.
Blacklisting Cisco is being mooted as a possible punishment according to Ars.
"But that would be regulation".
Possibility gets taken off the table.
It would be regulation if the state was telling others how to make their purchasing decisions. The state altering its own purchasing decisions is just good decision making.
Regulation is when you point a gun at someone else's face and tell them to do things the way you say, or else. He's talking about altering their own internal decisions. That's not regulation; that's administration.
Disclaimer: I work in the office where this occurred although NOT a part of this mess...
Having said that, if anyone has ever tried to work with the WV purchasing division you come to realize they practice real hard to rise to a level of incompetency the likes of which would make a pinhead blush. This isn't the first time officials have tried to "get around" them. Joe Manchin himself used a practice called stringing to avoid using them when he was governor. Projects languish over there for years meanwhile the clock is ticking on the funds available. I have had a contract sit there for 18 months with no end in sight.
I am not trying to excuse what was done simply trying to get others to see a broken system in this state. When you make things so difficult to work with of course people try to find a way a way around it. That is human nature. This incident has less to do with any sort of corruption (although some did exist in the Cisco sales rep and his representations) than it had to do with trying to meet the conditions of the grant quickly which was one of the conditions itself. Remember, stimulus funds were supposed to be used for "shovel ready" projects. Few states met that requirement....
"Not Performed Legally"? "'legally unauthorized purchasing process"?
So, the opposite of legal... would be illegal.
Also: "Cisco showed a wanton indifference to the interests of the public"
Really, a profit driven company tried to fleece the public? I'm shocked, shocked like a man making toast in the bath!
Cisco did not fleece the public they put in their proposal and the government accepted it, this has all the markings of money burning a hole in the auditors pocket. The auditor had $24 million to spend so they spent it, they don't care if they had a cheaper option, they wanted the best they could get for the money they had, even if they didn't need it. Unfortunately the way government spending works is you are expected to spend every dime they give you. If you don't spend it all then you are punished by getting less or none next time around.
Spending someone else's money on something they can't afford themselves, and don't really need anyway, in the name of fixing the economy . . . ?
Spending someone else's money on something they can't afford themselves, and don't really need anyway, in the name of fixing the economy . . . ?
Only in part. It is also to repair, replace, and create new ifrastructure, thereby allowing businesses to do more. That 'more' dtill requires the businesses to spend on expansion that uses said infrastructure. Right now the only thing businesses spend on this government to buy laws.
uh, mods, this isn't flamebait. It's a good point. The whole ARRA was to push "shovel ready" projects and stimulate the economy. In this case all it stimulated was Cisco's quarterly results.
But the righties are always telling us about this making jobs. I thought giving all the money to the "job creators" is exactly what they wanted to do? Thus they will hire people, not because they have work for them but because they have too much money or something.
Yep I am sure this created all kinds job hours over seas keeping the production line printing up router PCBs a little while longer. After being sold at Cisco's (I would guess based on price breaks I have seen them give VARs) 140% markup a whole lot of good US tax payer dollars help fill the deposit capital requirements of a European bank. After all we know Cisco never re-repatriates profits; okay maybe these particular dollars hit US entities and tax roles but they just offset other dollars that would hav
I get that you're being sarcastic, but the answer is no. Stimulus is effectively forcing us to borrow money to spend now in the name of fixing the economy and the spending is supposed to be on things of actual value. The classic example is if stimulus is simply about getting money into hands, just hire people to dig trenches with spoons. We don't need trenches and that's a stupid way to get them but it's "creating jobs".
The people who bought these should be punished. Publicly. Then they should be barred for life from public service.
Then the people who hired these fools should be punished. Publicly. And barred for life from public service.
Come on people. Firing is easy. It is hiring that is hard.
The people who voted for the people who hired these fools should be punished. Publicly. And barred for life from voting.
Those Responsible for Sacking the People Who Have Just Been Sacked, Have Been Sacked.
A Møøse once bit my sister
Depending on the scenario, this is what will happen:
Looking at the regular wholesale price in Germany (which is most likely higher than in the US), a price of $20k per piece would require e.g. a voice bundle. Plus, with a purchase of that many devices, Cisco would allow for a project price that would save at least another 20-30% on the purchase
As for the oversized, unless they were setting up every site with full 1G or more, they are oversized by at least one or two models
I can attest that while Cisco makes great products their sales folks and technical sales consultants are very unscrupulous at times. At a company I was working for we were looking for competitive bidding on a new Wifi Infrastructure. We were currently using old Cisco equipment however management wanted to have an open process and do a competitive bid. The Cisco sales staff and their channel support did everything they could to undermine the competitors even though our bake off showed that in terms of some features, the competitors had better features and security. Ultimately when they sensed that they would lose, they used a product roadmap meeting with our CIO as an opportunity to throw my management and my entire team under the bus at our "flawed" thinking.
Hard sell techniques? Yes. Unprofessional? Definitely.
In this case, it sounds like the Cisco sales rep was looking at his bonus, which was probably very very lucrative considering the total sales contract price. Any Network Architect or Engineer worth his salt wouldn't have recommended this overblown hardware based on the requirements. Hopefully West Virginia will use this opportunity to fix the holes in their procurement process so this doesn't happen again because I don't see Cisco ever giving them a refund.
Ultimately when they sensed that they would lose, they used a product roadmap meeting with our CIO as an opportunity to throw my management and my entire team under the bus at our "flawed" thinking.
So, was their evil plan foiled or not?
No, they didn't win but we did have a "called on the carpet" discussion about it. We presented our facts and also noted that the procurement organization was in charge and could verify our requirements and process. He couldn't say anything after that.
Cisco did make millions more on Nexus upgrades to the infrastructure but after that any time I see Cisco I just wince.
Nobody's sales staff is as bad as EMC. After loosing a bake off due to inability to meet minimum performance requirements (which everybody else had done) with there SE's allowed to do any tuning to the SAN and OS over 2 days. They went up two levels to the CEO face to face out of work and proceeded to trash testing methodologies, then insisted that doubling the server buy would make there stuff perform (to the tune of 15m, more than the SAN gear in total), and for the ultimate in wrong started making plea'
I'm not surprised, this is Cisco's M.O.
Every quote I've ever gotten from them has been massively inflated by speccing higher end equipment than is necessary. They always give the big pitch for the bigger product - usually to upper mgmt, whether it is overkill or not. Everyone wants to believe they are "the enterprise", so Cisco talks them into enterprise-grade equipment.
Not to say that the state employees shouldn't have questioned the quote. But odds are that the only technically knowledgable people involved were Cisco's people, and they are the pros at fleecing the sheep.
"Cisco 'showed a wanton indifference to the interests of the public' "
On what planet does CISCO bear a responsibility to the 'interests of the public'?
CISCO's responsibility to its shareholders, pretty much* full stop.
*I'd argue it's in its longer-term self interest to pay attention to the interests of its employees, and probably its home-community. But to the 'public in general'? None whatsoever.
The responsibility lies entirely with the 'expert' or 'consultant' hired to run the project. And if
On what planet does CISCO bear a responsibility to the 'interests of the public'?
CISCO's responsibility to its shareholders, pretty much* full stop.
Why? I mean, as a citizen of this country, I am expected to show some responsibility to the nation and my fellow citizens. I can't just run amuck and do as I please, raping and plundering. And not just because the law says I can't but because that's part of a social contract that helps keep civilization going.
Why should a corporation - especially in Am
Does their charter indicate that they need to pursue courses of action that are profitable to their shareholders? Of course. But not at a cost to the host nation that supports them. To suggest otherwise is extremely damaging to the society we live in, and it's disheartening to see such ideas even bandied about.
Sadly that seems to be the prevailing view among the business types these days, and has been since the "Reagan revolution." Business can do no wrong as long as it makes money for itself, and sometimes the share holders if management/board of directors isn't to busy screwing them, too. Likely they won't be happy until everyplace looks like Somalia.
"*I'd argue it's in its longer-term self interest to pay attention to the interests of its employees, and probably its home-community. But to the 'public in general'? None whatsoever."
So, what about customers? Neglecting the interests of your customers will make them turn to another, and will ultimately hurt all the stakeholders of a company. This near-sighted emphasis on shareholders in the anglo-saxon businessworld is STUPID. Even from the most extreme money grabbing greed perspective. I mean, your collec
Most of the report focuses on dual power supplies. Are those really needed? Maybe. Probably not in most cases.
Dual power supplies perform a couple of useful functions. If a power source fails, the other power supply fed by the alternate source keeps the router running. This is good for critical operations, and in maybe a few circumstances like the state police, it might have been useful to them. The other function is to keep the router running if a power supply dies. I've found this to be rare, but not impossible, with Cisco equipment. Again, it depends on how critical things are. Students and teachers in a school might be quite upset, and some online education processes can be disrupted, but education can still go on with substituted lessons during the time it takes for a replacement to arrive.
As for capacity, the router should have been chosen to match the designated capacity level, which did vary widely. Then when any facility needed to be upgraded to a higher capacity level, the router would be swapped out to match. A hand-me-down approach could be used for another smaller facility to use the bumped out router for their capacity growth. A range of routers in a pool could make that work. OTOH, politicians might also cry foul if a few routers are sitting in storage to support hurried replacement and hand-me-down steps.
It's funny because I just finished up doing a network for a small going on medium sized business who was bringing up a new headquarters on a shoestring budget and I wound up getting them a layer 3 HP switch for their headquarters. On HP's networking chart, it's called an edge switch or a remote-office switch, or something like that but it has plenty of backplane and PPS capacity for what they need as a core router.
However, it does not have a redundant power supply but I did specify the model that can do ro
My experience is this:
1) High level person talks to middle IT (and usually incompetent IT manager) about a bunch of buzzwords they read in an in-flight magazine
2) IT middle manager doesn't bother to say (or know) that buzzword won't work or is inappropriate for location.
3) Peons who actually work on the stuff tell MM all the issues, and as he doesn't understand plows forward anyway.
4) Bid gets put out and approved because its buzzword capable, and its what was the requested specifications.
5) Thing of dubious value gets installed ( or not)
6*) [Bonus!] actual needs aren't met because there no money left becuase of shiny new toy that makes upper level ppl happy that they are "cloud enabled"
I work in sales for another company selling servers. It's all in the information in the RFP. Do you think the original requirements document sent out specified individually what each police station or library would require? Never. There's very few employees out there in public or private sector that would go down to that detail.
Oftentimes the purchaser sees the budget they have available to them and hears the age old mantra "use it or lose it." So they buy the biggest and baddest piece of IT gear they can.
The case that I see now is with servers. Let's say some enterprise is building out a new datacenter using vmware and they want to operationally standardize on a single model. A common practice. So they go out a buy a 1000 Dell/HP/IBM servers. They don't go out and buy 17 of model X, 25 of model Y, etc etc all with different memory/disk configurations depending on the specific workload that will be put on each individual server.
If the RFPs specified every single requirement for every single location all customers would get a more accurate proposal. However, they don't.
"I shall expect a chemical cure for psychopathic behavior by 10 A.M. tomorrow, or I'll have your guts for spaghetti." -- a comic panel by Cotham


text:
Carter returns after missing 10 months with a torn quadriceps
ATLANTA — The Oakland Raiders have activated defensive end Andre Carter and moved defensive end behind Lamarr Houston on the depth chart.
Carter, who had 10 sacks last year with New England before suffering a torn quadriceps, is making his Raiders debut after being out the last 10 months.
Carter takes the spot of former second-string defensive end Jack Crawford, who is inactive. Carter has 76 sacks in 12 seasons.
Michael Huff starts at cornerback again with Shawntae Spencer recovering from a foot injury. Matt Giordano takes Huff's regular spot at free safety.
Willie Smith starts at right guard for Khalif Barnes, who is out with a groin injury.
The Atlanta Falcons report no lineup changes.
Read more Articles from Canada.com
twitter.com/thecanadacom © COPYRIGHT - POSTMEDIA NEWS


text:
User talk:Ddavis
Hi! Welcome to the website for the Wikimedia Foundation, the non-profit organization that operates Wikipedia and other free knowledge projects.
- If you have questions or problems related to Wikimedia fundraising or your donation please email firstname.lastname@example.com.
- For general information about the Wikimedia Foundation and its projects please see our frequently asked questions.
- For other questions about Wikimedia and its projects please email email@example.com or see other ways to contact us.
edit this template Welcome to the Wikimedia Foundation website.
Thanks for being here! This wiki does not exactly follow the same rules as the other Wikimedia projects, since it is not open to all for editing, and in case of disagreement, the organ of decision will be the Board. A rule of thumb however is that if we gave you access, that means we trust you. So please, do not be shy in editing this site. There is ample work for everyone :-)
- Please create your userpage with a short biography and other introductory information about yourself and the work you do. (Feel free to look at other user pages for examples.)
- All organizational pages may be found in the special category.
- For those willing to help with translation, please see m:Translation requests, and in particular the Foundation subpage /WMF.
- Please watch for feedback on Meta-Wiki and start discussions there.
- More about this wiki...
The Helpful One 21:02, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
Missing links on your user page
Hi. Your user page currently reads: "You can read more about our initiatives here and here." However, neither "here" is a link. :-) (I'd also say that the phrase "legal ethical" is a sin against the English language, but to each his own.) --MZMcBride (talk) 22:14, 29 May 2012 (UTC)


text:
Submission + - Xfinity 360 App Will Not Count Against Bandwidth Cap (tekgoblin.com)
tekgoblin writes: "Comcast internet subscribers can rejoice. Comcast has recently announced that they will not be counting content streamed via their Comcast Xfinity App on the Xbox 360 against their bandwidth caps. Comcast claims that since the data is only traversing their internal Comcast network that it will not count towards your 250 GB limit a month."


text:
Welcome to Ultimate Subaru Message Board, my lurker friend!
|Welcome to Ultimate Subaru Message Board, an unparalleled Subaru community full of the greatest Subaru gurus and modders on the planet! We offer technical information and discussion about all things Subaru, the best and most popular all wheel drive vehicles ever created.
We offer all this information for free to everyone, even lurkers like you! All we ask in return is that you sign up and give back some of what you get out - without our awesome registered users none of this would be possible! Plus, you get way more great stuff as a member! Lurk to lose, participate to WIN*!
* The joy of participation and being generally awesome constitutes winning
** Not an actual guarantee, but seriously, you probably won't regret it!
Serving the Subaru Community since May 18th, 1998!
New RC Project??
Posted 24 May 2011 - 08:42 PM
Well now I am thinking of building an all wheel steering 8x8 with a tamiya globe liner body... maybe run full leaf springs on it... not sure yet.... Probably run some 2.2 Rok Lok tires or something.... Putting me in class 3.
Rough sketch I made in photoshop (in about 30 seconds )
The real tires would be bigger than that, but it gives you a rough idea of body perportions and exo-tube work and stuff.
Sad that building this may cost more than a cheap subaru (something like $160 worth of axles and $100 worth of rubber on the road, etc, etc.)
I thought about maybe building a metal box for the back so it looks like a rally support vehicle meets dakar rally truck or something.... with Subaru stickers painted rally blue of course
Posted 24 May 2011 - 10:41 PM
Posted 24 May 2011 - 10:52 PM
I am thinking similar to this, but shorter, and with bigger tires, and a Subaru paint job
Posted 25 May 2011 - 01:38 PM
Here's what you sound like you're after. Pretty baddass.
Posted 25 May 2011 - 09:08 PM
Posted 26 July 2011 - 06:25 PM
Suspension fab is complete, needs a steering link still, and I have to figure out how to mount the body and where the put the electronics.
Posted 26 July 2011 - 08:48 PM
Also. I found those tapes. I can now make you dvd copies. Gimme time. . . But at least they showed up.
Posted 26 July 2011 - 09:51 PM
Way to follow thru Mike!
Also. I found those tapes. I can now make you dvd copies. Gimme time. . . But at least they showed up.
Nice, I have only been able to watch stuff on youtube recently for my subaru off road fix as I dont even have a VHS player to watch my tapes :-\
I really hope to have this ram ready for WCSS... should be fun to play around with. If I don't finish it I still have my scaler brat... complete with working front winch
Posted 28 July 2011 - 03:51 AM
Nice, I have only been able to watch stuff on youtube recently for my subaru off road fix as I dont even have a VHS player to watch my tapes :-\
I really hope to have this ram ready for WCSS... should be fun to play around with. If I don't finish it I still have my scaler brat... complete with working front winch
I was just showing people your Brats and this thread..
This is awesome Mike! Great job!
Posted 07 August 2011 - 07:04 PM
Just think.... an 8 wheel drive, 8 wheel steering beer cooler!!
Posted 16 August 2011 - 05:52 PM
But I am thinking of something like this roughly... maybe with a different cab that has less overhang though.
I figure it would cost at LEAST $400 to build it.... but it would be so worth it to have an 8 wheel drive SWRT beer cooler
Posted 20 August 2011 - 01:23 PM
My name's Charlie, and I'm hopelessly addicted to RC racing. Nice looking custom builds there. I've never had the patience to build anything like that. When I get a new RC, I turn into a lunatic. First there's the frustration of waiting on all the backordered parts to come in, then there's the mad rush to build it ASAP once the parts all get here.
Right now there is a kit for the SC10 4x4 truck sitting on my workbench waiting on it's brushless motor to get here so I can start the build.
My main racer is my HPI Baja 5B SS, and it's my all time favorite RC. I have neglected all my nitros ever since I got it.
Posted 21 August 2011 - 05:24 PM
Posted 12 September 2011 - 10:12 PM
Posted 12 September 2011 - 11:14 PM
Posted 06 October 2011 - 09:21 PM
I still need Frame, electronics, wheels and assembly.
This is roughly how the first 2 axles will be sitting in relation to the body. I will have 2 rear bodies for it. One will be a low CG "trials" body for comp use. The other one will be a dakar box style... which will work as a beer cooler.
Posted 27 October 2011 - 10:16 PM
Built ONE of the eight tire/wheel beadlocks. Took a little over an hour to get it all tightened down straight and true.
This ONE tire/wheel is $45
But worth it... I will have the coolest mobile 8 wheel drive dakar truck / mobile beer cooler when I am done
Posted 28 October 2011 - 12:56 PM
Posted 28 October 2011 - 07:01 PM
I just eyeballed it... its gonna be slow enough that the wheels don't have to be perfectly balanced.
Posted 29 October 2011 - 12:28 AM
I'm in a motel room, having trouble sleeping. I'm in Osawatomie KS for the Spooktacular race at Timberline raceway. Gotta get one more 5th scale race in before the outdoor season is over. Then I'll be stuck racing small stuff indoors all winter long. At least there are some good indoor races around here over the winter. Have you heard of the Chili Bowl? It's an indoor circle track race held in Tulsa every Jan. Next door they have the Chili Bowl Jr, an RC circle track race. Last year they added an offroad SCT race, and I'm entering this year if I'm not too broke to get a hotel room for 3 nights.
If any of you guys are close enough, come on down for some fun.
Posted 29 October 2011 - 10:50 AM
Posted 29 October 2011 - 10:55 PM
Posted 29 October 2011 - 11:16 PM
Posted 01 November 2011 - 12:18 PM
Posted 29 November 2011 - 09:11 AM
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users


text:
Welcome to Ultimate Subaru Message Board, my lurker friend!
|Welcome to Ultimate Subaru Message Board, an unparalleled Subaru community full of the greatest Subaru gurus and modders on the planet! We offer technical information and discussion about all things Subaru, the best and most popular all wheel drive vehicles ever created.
We offer all this information for free to everyone, even lurkers like you! All we ask in return is that you sign up and give back some of what you get out - without our awesome registered users none of this would be possible! Plus, you get way more great stuff as a member! Lurk to lose, participate to WIN*!
* The joy of participation and being generally awesome constitutes winning
** Not an actual guarantee, but seriously, you probably won't regret it!
Serving the Subaru Community since May 18th, 1998!
Proud new Owner
Posted 01 June 2007 - 04:52 PM
Posted 01 June 2007 - 05:24 PM
There are plenty of other options - EJ motor from later models (90s era), 5-stud bolt pattern swap from XT6, etc. Read through the retrofitting forum and you'll see plenty of upgrades and ideas.
I just became the proud owner of a 1986 subaru brat. I want to fix it up but i really don't know where to begin. I have never been real knowledgeable when it comes to fixing cars. But I have an idea of what I would like to do and was wondering the best way to go about it. I will be picking the car up tomorrow and will then be able to get an up close and personal look at it. It's a 1986 subaru brat GL. I want to get some more HP to it. Always wanted a vehicle with a turbo, possible to buy a turbo and install it? Would that require a new tranny? Lifting doesn't seem like it'll be that hard but for shocks if i lifted would that require new shocks? I am just bubbling over with questions. I haven't been sleeping well lately because i have been so excited about getting this car. I don't know much about these definitions such as EA81 and EA82. I have come to understand though that i think my car has an EA81. Would love to have a mentor that could break this jargon down into dummy language Thanks so much!
Posted 01 June 2007 - 05:29 PM
That's the engine i was looking at to put in my subaru. Is that a possibility? You mentioned rear discs. Do you mean brakes? Or is that something for the transmission? Again im not sure what a lot of this stuff means but i am really interested in learning about it.
You have an EA81, there is a EA81T (turbo) variant out there but it's not just a bolt-on job. The standard (4 speed manual) transmission isn't really suited to much power (and has a horrible gap between 2nd and third gear), so the EA82 ("L" series) transmission (5 speed manual) is a good bolt-up option - there is a kit offered by a member here which makes it easier to install. You should fit the EA82 turbo rear discs at the same time - they must be off a 4wd turbo and not a 2wd turbo. A few member have them f/s for around the $100 mark.
There are plenty of other options - EJ motor from later models (90s era), 5-stud bolt pattern swap from XT6, etc. Read through the retrofitting forum and you'll see plenty of upgrades and ideas.
Posted 01 June 2007 - 05:48 PM
Posted 01 June 2007 - 07:58 PM
There are some, like me, that would even travel a bit to lend a helping hand if you really need it.
Posted 01 June 2007 - 08:51 PM
Both require about the same amount wiring work. The ej22 make more power in non turbo form than the ea82t does. And the ej series is so much more reliable than the ea82's. There are lots of good resources on this board for your swap. And the board members are very helpful with questions.
There are some, like me, that would even travel a bit to lend a helping hand if you really need it.
well said. I don't think it's a stretch to say that the EA82 is probably the worst motor subaru has ever made (rivaled only by the early DOHC 2.5s, but once the headgaskets are done on those, it's not really a problem), and the phase I EJ22 is probably the strongest.
same amount of work
similar power, different place (the turbo will have a little more peak hp, but less torque in the low end)
and see my post in other thread.
and certainly don't pay $650 for an EA82t engine (you'll still need the whole wiring harness and an EA81t crossmember (or custom exhaust) to make it work). you can get a whole legacy donor car (everything you need except adapter plate and some random hoses and stuff) for much less than that!
Posted 01 June 2007 - 08:55 PM
Both require about the same amount wiring work. The ej22 make more power in non turbo form than the ea82t does. And the ej series is so much more reliable than the ea82's. There are lots of good resources on this board for your swap. And the board members are very helpful with questions.
There are some, like me, that would even travel a bit to lend a helping hand if you really need it.
Posted 01 June 2007 - 09:03 PM
I've got an engine hoist and a good bit of mechanical ability about me. When the time comes, and you have every bit together that you need to swap in the motor, just let me know. I am probably about 2.5-3 hours from ashville. And I would be more than glad to load up my hoist and tools and take a weekend road trip.
Oh yes... Pics are a must...
Posted 01 June 2007 - 09:25 PM
Posted 01 June 2007 - 10:09 PM
The ea81t crossmember is not going to be easy at all to find. Two years were all they were availible, 83&84, and not all too common. You can modify the n/a crossmember if yo have some welding equipment handy though. I've got pictures of what each crossmember looks like if you would like to compare.
Which ever engine you decide on, make sure you get the entire wiring harness from where the dash plugs into the rearward wiring of the car. Its best to get a whole car as a donor, but if you can't do that make sure you know that the junk yard will have the particular car on hand untill after you are done...
One more question though. You mention lifting it, is this going to be a off road truck or just a lift for looks?
Posted 01 June 2007 - 11:32 PM
the N/A motor has been proven to hold up to 300awhp with lower compression pistons, and a piggyback ECU. but no EA-series tranny will hold up to that kind of power for very long. especially with oversized tires.
like I said in my other post. be patient, and do your research. watch this forum, and read everything you can find. aswell as places like www.nasioc.com www.rs25.com www.legacycentral.org and www.sl-i.net
I'd also highly recommend searching for a local subaru forum. www.mnsubaru.com has been one of the most valuable resources I've ever had. not to mention the fact that their all local, so people can come over to give me a hand if I need it.
The EJ22t may sound like the perfect candidate, but a turbo drops in a whole host of issues. things like engine management, exhaust routing, more things to fail, etc.
in my opinion.....you'll be happiest if you just get your hands on a non-turbo '90-'94 legacy with a 5-speed, and drop the whole drivetrain in your brat. if you don't plan to do any extreme offroading, you won't need the lo range. especially with the 4.111 axle ratio of the legacies. you'll have to fab up a transmission crossmember and some shift linkage stuff, but you won't need an engine-tranny adapter plate....
go the the USRM (link at the top of the page), then click the engine section, then look for a post by me about the EJ swap write-up. download EA2EJ.pdf, and read it 6 or 8 times. that'll probably answer most of your questions.
and remember, BE PATIENT!!!! don't rush these things. the beauty of subarus is the amazing range of modifications that are possible. this means 2 things:
1. it's easy to get exactly what you want out of them
2. it's easy to drop a lot of money for stuff you don't really need
so do the research. take the build one step at a time. drive the car a lot, find out what you want out of it, and how you use it, so you can modify it to accommodate. I'd also highly recommend finding a local club, and see if someone will let you drive their WRX. a turbo is very definitely not for everyone.
also, if you find a local car enthusiast club, I'm sure you can find someone with an engine hoist you can borrow. if not....they're like $200 at Northern Tool....
Posted 02 June 2007 - 05:48 AM
Posted 02 June 2007 - 08:08 AM
you need to learn to walk before you can run.
Do a bit of reading on doing a carb swap to a Weber 32/36.
Take the muffler off and replace it with a free flow unit.
i.e. start small -> work up
Like Chux says - drive it and enjoy it, get comfortable with
wrenching - then dive in the deep end.
I have been on this board a long time and have seen
too many over zealous projects end up in disaster
due to many things.
Just a thought from an old wrench.
I must add.
Nice to see such enthusiasm and I wish many
miles of smiles in your new Roo.
Posted 02 June 2007 - 06:36 PM
Posted 02 June 2007 - 10:58 PM
The ea81 radiator will do fine for the ej22, I would say that you might need a new one though.
Like everybody else has said get a feel for Steve before deciding on what to do with him. Each vehicle will have its own personallity about it. He will let you know whats right for him.
Whenever you get all the issues worked out on the body and stock motor and cooling system, then worry about getting more power for it. Plenty of super great info on this site for anything you might run up against...
Posted 03 June 2007 - 01:03 PM
Posted 03 June 2007 - 08:39 PM
Good to know theres a community for brat people!
Remember some of us are Brumby people when you are searching.
Same thing, other end of the earth.
Posted 04 June 2007 - 08:43 PM
Posted 04 June 2007 - 09:06 PM
BTW... Check out some of MattyB's posts... (you'll enjoy them)
Posted 04 June 2007 - 09:10 PM
And explain a little better the not having a sturdy place to jack...
Posted 04 June 2007 - 09:26 PM
Posted 04 June 2007 - 09:30 PM
Welcome to the wierd little world of owning a subaru. I found that they are kind of exotic. The first thing you need to do is save up $400 and buy a 4" lift kit. Put on some Tocoma wheels, and you will have the coolest ride in town. Everyone will comment on it, even little old ladies.
Or you could lower it, do a 5 lug swap, and have everyone wondering what you were thinking...
Posted 04 June 2007 - 10:27 PM
Or you could lower it, do a 5 lug swap, and have everyone wondering what you were thinking...
haha already decided on the 4inch lift kit! About the thermostat my car is heating up too quickly so i need a thermostat that regulates faster, a lower temp thermostat. I would love to get some nice tocoma wheels. About the jack, my little jack that comes inside the hood just didn't seem sturdy enough to me on my gravel so i bought a craftsman 2 1/4 ton hydraulic jack with two jack stands. the original jack is supposed to fit in that groove just under the doorframe. I don't know any good spots to put my jack so as not to mess up my car, and i also want to use my jackstands.
Posted 04 June 2007 - 10:31 PM
As long as the structure is still sound, or even halfway sound. You can jack it up under the subframe rails, or use the middle of the engine crossmember, and the outsides of the crossmember right by the y-pipe for the jackstands.
We still wanna see pics of your brat...
Posted 04 June 2007 - 11:16 PM
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users


text:
Rachel Weisz Just Really Likes Necklaces
The Rucksack: Another fine waxed cotton rucksack, for all your rucksacking needs. [Archival Clothing]
Neuromancing: William Gibson offers some wisdom on marketing, technology, and putting chips in your brain. [Vice]
The Newest Latest: Fresh from Fashion Week, here's the latest from Band of Outsiders. [The Pursuit Aesthetic]
Your New Vacation House: Devil's Island is a pretty awesome spot in Northern Wisconsin. Now you know. [Boing Boing]


text:
Al Gore also invented general purpose computing. Why else do you think they call it an Algore-ism?
He solved the issue of Global Warming? Already?
The audacity of hope.
Don't worry, they are still going to implement the carbon tax. Never let a crisis go to waste.
> Don't worry, they are still going to implement the carbon tax.
Of course. Because it has never been about global warming or CO2. Otherwise CO2 emitted by India and China would have been as bad as emissions in the 1st world. But Kyoto exempted them. It is about a once in a lifetime opportunity for the 'enlightened good progressives' to get almost total control over all aspects of life in the West and thus finally stamp out everything they don't like by taxing it out of practicality. And the things t
Ranting about Kyoto would make a lot more sense if the United States Congress had ratified it.
I really don't think that the current Congress is a whole lot more likely to ratify it than any past Congress, but who knows.
Where's the logic in this? We can't complain about problems in a treaty unless we ratify it? The problems are the reason not to ratify it.
Just because Kyoto wasn't ratified doesn't mean that a carbon tax can't be implemented in the future.
"Of course. Because it has never been about global warming or CO2. Otherwise CO2 emitted by India and China would have been as bad as emissions in the 1st world. But Kyoto exempted them."
Yes. But you don't have any clue why.
It has something to do with the fact that it is the industrialized countries that have been emptying CO2 into the atmosphere in ever-greater amounts for the last 2 centuries or so before realizing it might be a problem. The premise of the Kyoto agreement is: they are the ones that have created the problem so far, they're the ones that are already industrialized and have most of the money. They are therefore the ones best positioned to come up with technical solutions and ways to meet lowered targets or at least flatten out production. The race is to do that before countries like India and China ramp up as fast as people are expecting given their populations.
How can we possibly say to countries that are in the early stages of industrialization "Oh, you can't do exactly what we've been doing for the last couple of centuries, or it will be a disaster!" It's like eating 3/4 of the pizza at the party and then telling a skinny latecomer: "Whoa there. Don't go eating all the pizza that's left. It's bad for you and we also have to share", while still stuffing your face as fast as ever.
The whole point was to meet the goals of Kyoto and THEN say to India, China and other developing countries: "See? This can be done. Now it's your turn to meet the same targets." That was the bargain.
Ever since then there has been this myth that India and China are somehow completely and forever off the hook. Well, they probably will be because we're dragging our asses on what we committed to do.
Here's hoping the world can make do without any kind of agreement, and that the predictions expected from that scenario are wrong. Hope really hard.
"Poverty is the biggest polluter."
That was back when pollution meant stuff like raw sewage. Nowadays, pollution means one of the inevitable results of complete burning of carbon-containing materials. Which, since there ain't no replacement for burning of carbon-containing materials (nukes ain't happening and the rest ain't sufficient), means pollution equals energy use. So in the guise of "stopping pollution", the EPA can ration energy. Cool, eh?
"Poverty is the biggest polluter."
I love Gandhi, but BS, the US is one of the richest countries in the world, but at the same time for sure the biggest polluter, thanks to ACs, SUVs, etc. and the lack of sidewalks, staircases (you must have been in an office building where people take the elevator from the 8th to the 9th floor), to name a few.
The real fear for the environment is that India and China are coming out of poverty.
I love Gandhi
Are you aware that Indira Gandhi [wikipedia.org] is not the same person one usually refers to as simply "Gandhi" [wikipedia.org]?
But I must say I agree with the rest of your comment, the US is the biggest polluter and owes the rest of the world some respect. We all share the same planet.
And going back to the article, this shows the typical tactics of people who don't want to do their part in fighting global warming. They try to imply that the enormous amount of evidence that has been collected demonstrating the anthropogenic influence in global warming is just a bunch of isolated data. Yet they want to use one single measurement as evidence that there really isn't something like a sudden raise [wikipedia.org] in temperatures over the last few hundred years that's more abrupt than anything ever seen on earth.
Honestly if we don't stop the up and coming countries from repeating our mistakes then what do we gain? A big fat nothing. A so hate this excuse of its not fair to them, well tough shit. We know better now and they can't claim to not know better either. If we get them off on the right foot it is going to be a lot easier for all of us. If we excuse them then we just push the problem off to the next generation. Of course that seems to be the aim of almost all politicians these days, push off to another generation what we are not willing to do today.
I have a more apt analogy than your pizza one.... just because Jack murders a dozen people doesn't excuse John from killing one.
How can we possibly say to countries that are in the early stages of industrialization "Oh, you can't do exactly what we've been doing for the last couple of centuries, or it will be a disaster!"
Of course we can say that, because if they will do exactly what we've been doing for the last couple of centuries, it will be a disaster. No amount of political correctness bullshit can change that.
Ever since then there has been this myth that India and China are somehow completely and forever off the hook.
There's no myth, because there's no hook. If, as you say, Western countries impose those limits for themselves just to set a righteous example for everyone else to follow, then the most likely reaction you'll get from comrade General Secretary of the Chinese Communist Party is, "gee, these guys are even more stupid than we thought". Since there's no obligation for China to follow suit, according to Kyoto, then why would they?
Of course, this all is no excuse for doing some serious changes for the sakes of ourselves - like switching to mostly nuclear, investing heavily into thermonuclear, and using solar/wind/tidal wherever there's opportunity. But that's a whole different kettle of fish; and, I suspect, eventually, when time comes to bring China in line with regard to emissions, it will have to be done at a gunpoint, and no "gestures of goodwill" today will change that.
Yeah, damn him here he was promising change and first thing he does is to halt everything and preserve the status quo. Politicans, you just can't trust them.
"the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal." [breitbart.com]
Moses had nothing on this guy. He only parted one measly sea, let alone oceans.
Yeah, and us humans have only been on Earth for 0.00002% of it's existence.... species come and go, mostly without humans. So why worry?
Except, there is a problem in your logic. We can understand what has caused the coming and going of many of the global glaciations over the history of the world.
For example, the glaciation that occurred in the late Devonian is linked to the spread of plants on land. Before this time, there were no trees. They captured a large amount of atmospheric CO2, triggering global cooling and glaciation. The result was one of the "big 5" mass extinctions on the planet, with about 50% loss at the genera level.
Guess what? Humans have spread all across the planet! Guess what? It's not arrogant to collect data that shows we are actively changing the system and try to make predictions based on it.
I'm not advocating any certain policy; but I am saying it is foolish to assume that we can't change the world, and that we can't understand complex systems.
Actually, you should thank the Somali pirates. Now, I think we can all agree that, based on overwhelming evidence [seanbonner.com], piracy prevents global warming. There's UNDENIABLE PROOF for that. I mean, if you can't tell that correlation equals causation, well, you're just in denial, or being paid off. With the recent surges in piracy, how can that ice not grow? It is simple logic, stupid! Now, I know that the mainstream media will probably call them thieves and killers (because they are obviously in the pocket of Al Gore and Big Carbon Credit), but I'm going to call them what they really are: Heroes, righteous environmental crusaders, examples for all of us to follow. Somali pirates, I salute you!
The antarctic is supposed to be a desert because it is too cold to snow.
The fact the central area is now accumulating snow points to warming and accompanying increased precipitation.
The ice sheets have increased their outward flow. Also another indicator of increased precipitation and warmth.
One has to be very careful what one looks at for indicators of global warming/cooling.
I don't mean to discredit what you say, but could you possibly give a better explanation of what's occurring and how it's related to global warming.
It seems that some times every event is a sure sign that X is occurring, whether or not there's actually any scientific proof behind it or not. It reminds me of whenever something happened it would be attributed to God, the gods, or some other deity supposedly controlling the fate of mankind depending on the time period.
I just don't want things to devolve to that point. I have no reason to doubt what you're saying, but could you provide some links that explain the science behind your comments or provide a more thorough explanation yourself. I don't mean to call you out as my own knowledge of climate science is largely non-existent, but I still tend to take statements without further explanation with a grain of salt.
Actually the bit about snow was misleading. The article was about sea ice thickness. Sea ice is caused by cold air flowing from a pole toward the equator and cooling the ocean. More about that in a bit.
Back to the bit about "to cold to snow". Really cold air carries very little water vapour.
http://www.theweatherprediction.com/habyhints/222/ [theweatherprediction.com]
Now back to the article. The article described 1 year sea ice thickness. This is ice that forms on the sea over one winter and is essentially a measure of how cold the air was that winter. So first thought is that more ice implies a colder winter. Yes I agree with that. The question is what is the average global temperature. Global warming (called climate change by those who think explaining all the details will confuse people) does not mean it warms up everywhere.
Fact: Cold air does not come from the polar regions. Cold air comes from high in the atmosphere where air radiates heat to space. Warm air comes from contact with sun warmed ground and sea.
http://www.rcn27.dial.pipex.com/cloudsrus/wind.html [pipex.com]
So the polar regions are cold because they get more cold air dropped on them from high in the atmosphere. What pushes the whole cycle is "heat". We like to think of hot and cold as relative to our norms. Real tempeature is degrees Kelvin. So the polar regions just have less heat than the equatorial regions.
Back to the circulation putting more heat into the system results in a global warming but also in an accelerated wind system. This will push more cold air down at the poles. Essentially making the poles colder and the polar winds colder. This will make the polar regions colder --- when they are not heated by the sun.
So from global warming we can actually expect colder winters at the poles. Overall they will be shorter due to the added heat. There are lots of balances and more complex things. Particularly the global air circulation is not 1 cycle equator to poles, but banded. But the general idea is there.
So from global warming we can actually expect colder winters at the poles.
Truly this is a theory that cannot be disproven.
When we thought the poles were melting, the infamous pictures of a wet polar bear on a little ice shelf were everywhere and we were told that this was the direct result of warming.
So now it seems the global warming theory can have its ice and melt it too.
Of course it can.
Just like I can say we're getting less percipitation but more flooding in the northwest US. If there is a huge deluge of percipitation but then a 3 month drought then that can actually cause worse flooding later.
Similarly it could rain more often but still rain less.
That's why the leading worry about Global Warming isn't that you're going to need to get 3 more days of nice sunny weather every day. It's that Global Warming will cause UNPREDICTABLE weather patterns. Such as freak deep freezes. Unexpected ice patterns etc in addition to hotter summers and draught.
Maybe a region will see its weather patterns change such that they receive tons of percipitation during the winter but none during the growing season. That's a bad change for agriculture even if the region receives "more rain".
You're building a strawman against climate change that "Scientists claim that global warming will cause global heating in every point on earth." That's not a claim of global warming. And when shipping lanes open through the north pole (where polar bears reside) I would hardly be hasty to suggest that in general ice sheets aren't shrinking simply because one small region on earth is seeing increased ice.
There's increased ice in my freezer too... does that disprove global warming? Look at the data as a whole not cherry picked exceptions to the data trends.
Fact: Cold air does not come from the polar regions. Cold air comes from high in the atmosphere where air radiates heat to space. Warm air comes from contact with sun warmed ground and sea.
http://www.rcn27.dial.pipex.com/cloudsrus/wind.html [pipex.com]
Your reference does not support your alledged Fact, and your alledged Fact ignores the concept of adiabatic warming [vsc.edu]. The poles are colder than the equator because they receive less energy from the sun, not because descending air is colder. This casts a LOT of doubt to the validity of the rest of your arguments as well.
*Note that the adiabatic warming [vsc.edu] reference is from an education institution site [vsc.edu], not a property development site [pipex.com].
> Besides, the idea of it being too cold to snow is a myth:
The article you quoted says --
Once it drops below -20F, your chances of snow are virtually nil (but still possible).
I will take that "virtually nil (but still possible)" and say that effectively it does get to cold to snow.
And -20F is only just starting to get cold for places like Antarctica, (or even continental/northern Canada and Russia). Where I live, we regularly get 2-3 weeks with highs below -20F, and you can depend on those weeks to be sunny and dry.
The fact the central area is now accumulating snow points to warming and accompanying increased precipitation.
Sure, but many climate change alarmists, including Al Gore, have been hyping the threat of rising sea levels due to melting ice. So if global warming is going to cause ice to grow in some areas and shrink in others, as it will, then that still weakens their argument.
Sea ice has a minimal affect on sea level. So anything about more or less sea ice is to a first order irrelevant to global sea level.
http://moregrumbinescience.blogspot.com/2009/04/ice-and-sea-level.html [blogspot.com]
http://www.radix.net/~bobg/faqs/sea.level.faq.html [radix.net]
In terms of the ice, there are five identifiable reservoirs, only one
of which is expected to be able to have catastrophic effects on sea
level. They are sea ice, mountain glaciers, the Greenland ice sheet,
the East Antarctic ice sheet, and the West Antarctic ice sheet. The one
expected to be potentially catastrophic is West Antarctica.
Catastrophic is taken to mean meters of sea level in a few hundred years
or less.
First, why can't the other four be catastrophic? Sea ice cannot
change sea level much. That it can do so at all is because sea ice is
not made of quite the same material as the ocean. Sea ice is much
fresher than sea water (5 parts per thousand instead of about 35). When
the ice melts (pretend for the moment that it does so instantly and
retains its shape), the resultant melt water is still slightly less
dense than the original sea water. So the meltwater still 'stands' a
little higher than the local sea level. The amount of extra height
depends on the salinity difference between ice and ocean, and
corresponds to about 2% of the thickness of the original ice floe. For
30 million square kilometers of ice (global maximum extent) and average
thickness of 2 meters (the Arctic ice is about 3 meters, the Antarctic
is about 1), the corresponding change in global sea level would be 2
(meters) * 0.02 (salinity effect) * 0.10 (fraction of ocean covered by
ice), or 4 mm. Not a large figure, but not zero either. My thanks to
email@example.com (Rick Chappell) for making me work this out.
As an indicator of other things 1 year sea ice thickness is relevant on a second order. It is an indicator of the local winter average temperature. Local temperature changes are not global. I say that this indicator of a more cold winter shows an increased polar air circulation which is actually a positive indicator for global warming in general.
I haven't been involved in any climate research, but what matters is WHY this is hapening.
Is it, as suggested above, because water falling there as snow instead of in Australia and Texas as rain is increasing volumes? Other explanations include:
- Thermal expansion of the ice
- Ice melting lubricates glacial movement
- Ice sheets detatching allows faster glacial movement
- Lower temperatures resulting in greater freezing of seawater.
Honestly though, conceptually this isn't amazingly complex. If we see temperatures rising, as measured by reliable equipment, thats called warming. If the ice thickens as the termperatures rise, that means something interesting is happening; It doesn't mean things aren't getting warmer.
When presented with scientific data, vested interests say "Oh yeah!? Prove it!". Instead of simply suggesting that they read the science reports and papers, many have tried to find anecdotes (permafrost, ice sheet collapse, etc etc) but these things don't 'prove' global warming any more than an ice thickening disproves it.
If only the population at large had an education sufficient to allow public discussion of the data found through research, there would be a great deal more consensus on this and other issues.
Science is not subjective.
For the record, I'd like to provider a short list of things that aren't cogent political arguments:
1) Television catch phrases
2) Proper nouns
3) Noises
5) Movie titles
last year, the ice had a maximum thickness of 1.89m, its densest in 10 years. The average thickness of the ice at Davis since the 1950s is 1.67m.
Shhhh! Don't let frivolous things like logic and facts get in the way of bashing the environmentalism movement. Protecting the environment is bad for business and in a truly free market there shouldn't be any restrictions on my megacorporation's right to pollute the atmosphere. After all, people are smart, rational, and think ahead so if my company pollutes they'll just take their business elsewhere and I'll go out of business. Can't you see how beautiful libertarianism and the free market is? It solves climate change better than those silly scientists and regulations ever could.
While the majority of ski resorts have reported a trend of less annual snowfall per year for the past twenty years or so,
Really? Where is that info from?
Because the data I can see says otherwise - like the SNOTEL Precipitation Data Table [usda.gov] from Wolf Creek Pass [usda.gov] in Colorado. Or Squaw Valley [usda.gov] in California. Or Daisy Peak [usda.gov] in Montana.
We've had dry years in Colorado over the past decade, but also some banner snow years. Similarly for other places in other states.
So where does the data validating that generally ski resorts have lower snowpack over the last twenty years come from? Or is it just something everyone "knows".
In reality I think that's a data point too variable to indicate anything one way or the other.
To my knowledge, it is already known, that the ice thickens in West-Antarctica (News from 2002 [bbc.co.uk]). Davis-Station seems to be located there.
I am interested, what new findings in West-Australia lead to Dr Allison's evaluation on the development of the whole continent of Antarctica. The posted article itself is a bit sparse on facts.
>Sure things might get hairy for a while
Look at where the coastline was during warmer spochs. "Hairy" is a polite word.
We also weren't trying to feed six billion humans last time it was seriously warm.
Time for a mature, enlightened debate on climate change, by people with thorough knowledge of the field who don't parrot long-discredited bullshit at all! I do so enjoy these discussions. They're almost as intelligent as Slashdot discussions on economics.
People hear "climate change" and "global warming" and think all the ice is going away. Thing is, while there are certain large ice masses that are almost certainly going to melt - the West Antarctic Ice Sheet, for instance - it's an open question how the bulk of Antarctica and Greenland is going to respond to a warmer climate. There will certainly be increased summer melting around the periphery, but there is some speculation that the total ice volume in these places will increase due to warmer (but still below freezing) temperatures. Thing is, for much of the year the air is so cold there that it just doesn't have the carrying capacity for much total water volume. Warmer air can simply carry more water than colder air, which can mean more snow and more ice pack. I say "can mean" because climate change can also affect weather patterns, which can alter the amount of precipitation that falls or even alter the source region for the precipitation that eventually reaches a given location.
However when it comes to smaller glaciers and ice fields, where the average annual temperature was significantly closer to freezing to begin with, it's more obvious that they're shrinking or completely going away.
FWIW up until a few years ago I worked in a climate research lab where we studied the climate records in ice from Greenland and Antarctica.
So why in the hell would anyone support polluting this planet?
Because we are the purest form of evil! Anyone who thinks slightly differently from you, must be the spawn of Satan.
You see, no-one wants to "pollute the planet". None of us like it because of the reasons you list. But in the real world it's a complex relationship between people living and the impact they have. Your edict to "reduce pollution" is all well and good, but in what ways? If the way you choose means a 10% increase in job loss, is that really OK? Disallowing all car travel in a state forever and ever would be a great way to reduce pollution - and to really screw over a lot of people.
There are ways to reduce pollution and/or save the environment that are less impactful on people's lives. So rather than claiming everyone really wants to pollute, help people to understand how they can pollute less without losing much in return.
This must be a first.
To anyone who actually has done a bit of looking into Antarctica in climatic terms, this won't be surprising.
Start with a good map of Antarctica: Wikipedia has an excellent picture. You can see the Transantarctic Mountains pretty easily on the picture--it's the line roughly in the center. To the right is East Antarctica; to the left West Antarctica.
Now, you see those two patches of rather gray ice just west of the mountains? That's the part of the sheet that isn't on land. Much of West Antarctica is sitting on ice shelves. East Antarctica is basically a giant sheet of ice a few kilometers thick sitting on land.
For climatic reasons, East Antarctica is colder than West, and it simply doesn't snow that much. The massive cyclone that appears each winter doesn't help.
Gaining mass means you're getting more snow, which means that the temperature is, you know, getting warmer. The annual mean temperature is -57ÂC at the South Pole...
Now, many of you will say "this debunks global warming", etc., but you're missing a key part of the equation. West Antarctica may be 10% of the ice sheet of Antarctica, but when you compare that the entire Antarctic ice sheet comprises the majority of freshwater on Earth, a collapse of its ice sheet would result in significant rise of sea levels. And what's preventing its collapse? The Ross and Ronne Ice Shelves. And yep, they're shrinking.
The climate changes, because that is what climates do. Not only that, climates do not change in an orderly and expected fashion! The politicians and media pretend that all change is uniform. That if the climate is changing then it will change uniformly warmer and warmer until we all roast to death. Or that it will get cooler and cooler until glaciers roll over the continents. Neither view is correct, yet that is what we are told to believe. It is inconceivable to the politico-media complex that some places my get cooler and others warmer. Inconceivable that the climate has a balancing mechanism that prevents runaway change. Inconceivable that human beings are a part of nature and not an external contagion.
This constant cry that we are "destroying the planet" must stop. It is an absurd claim. Certainly we human beings should be good caretakers of our planet. We should seek to reduce pollution and other environmental externalities. But the fear mongering is not helping, and must stop.
A bit from George Carlin, the Big Electron rest his soul...
* * *
We're so self-important. So self-important. Everybody's going to save something now. "Save the trees, save the bees, save the whales, save those snails." And the greatest arrogance of all: save the planet. What? Are these fucking people kidding me? Save the planet, we don't even know how to take care of ourselves yet. We haven't learned how to care for one another, we're gonna save the fucking planet? I'm getting tired of that shit. Tired of that shit. I'm tired of fucking Earth Day, I'm tired of these self-righteous environmentalists, these white, bourgeois liberals who think the only thing wrong with this country is there aren't enough bicycle paths. People trying to make the world save for their Volvos. Besides, environmentalists don't give a shit about the planet. They don't care about the planet. Not in the abstract they don't. Not in the abstract they don't. You know what they're interested in? A clean place to live. Their own habitat. They're worried that some day in the future, they might be personally inconvenienced. Narrow, unenlightened self-interest doesn't impress me.
Besides, there is nothing wrong with the planet. Nothing wrong with the planet. The planet is fine. The PEOPLE are fucked. Difference. Difference. The planet is fine. Compared to the people, the planet is doing great. Been here four and a half billion years. Did you ever think about the arithmetic? The planet has been here four and a half billion years. We've been here, what, a hundred thousand? Maybe two hundred thousand? And we've only been engaged in heavy industry for a little over two hundred years. Two hundred years versus four and a half billion. And we have the CONCEIT to think that somehow we're a threat? That somehow we're gonna put in jeopardy this beautiful little blue-green ball that's just a-floatin' around the sun?
The planet has been through a lot worse than us. Been through all kinds of things worse than us. Been through earthquakes, volcanoes, plate tectonics, continental drift, solar flares, sun spots, magnetic storms, the magnetic reversal of the poles...hundreds of thousands of years of bombardment by comets and asteroids and meteors, worlwide floods, tidal waves, worldwide fires, erosion, cosmic rays, recurring ice ages...And we think some plastic bags, and some aluminum cans are going to make a difference? The planet...the planet...the planet isn't going anywhere. WE ARE!
We're going away. Pack your shit, folks. We're going away. And we won't leave much of a trace, either. Thank God for that. Maybe a little styrofoam. Maybe. A little styrofoam. The planet'll be here and we'll be long gone. Just another failed mutation. Just another closed-end biological mistake. An evolutionary cul-de-sac. The planet'll shake us off like a bad case of fleas. A surface nuisance.
You wanna know how the planet's doing? Ask those people at Pompeii, who are frozen into position from volcanic ash, how the planet's doing. You wanna know if the planet's all right, ask those people in Mexico City or Armenia or a hundred other places buried under thousands of tons of earthquake rubble, if they feel like a threat to the planet this week. Or how about those people in Kilowaia, Hawaii, who built their homes right next to an active volcano, and then wonder why they have lava in the living room.
The planet will be here for a long, long, LONG time after we're gone, and it will heal itself, it will cleanse itself, 'cause that's what it does. It's a self-correcting system. The air and the water will recover, the earth will be renewed, and if it's true that plastic is not degradable, well, the planet will simply incorporate plastic into a new pardigm: the earth plus plastic. The earth doesn't share our prejudice towards plastic. Plastic came out of the earth. The earth probably sees plastic as just another one of its children. Could be the only reason the earth allowed us to be spawned from it in the first place. It wanted plastic for itself. Didn'
Interesting about a regions ice thinkness; however, this has nothing to do with CO2 levels, or global warming...
Maybe the politics and religion of SlashDot can for once leave the science to let's say the 'scientists'?
There are so many factors in 'global warming' from desalination and currents to polar winds just to top off a couple of important things that makes this report have nothing to do with overall climate status/change.
There is also the effect of mankind's pollution in opacity, as just the increases the Bush administration allowed in the past eight years would have once again decreased the amount of sunlight that gets to the surface, giving the earth a temporary cooling, that when stabalized could mean the global warming effects would hit many times faster than even the most extreme left alarmist would argue.
I love the goofs that want to tell everyone the Global Warming is in effect on a hot summer day and the other goofs that tell us it doesn't exist on a cold day.
Climate disturbance caused by man's contribution to enviornmental factors are not so easy to understand, but is something that needs to be taken seriously, as the science does show humans DO impact the climate. If it is more than expected, then watch as Europe and the north coast of America freezes over, which would be 'Global Warming'.
Do people honestly think that Global climates changes are 'not' important to mankind? History shows that natural changes nearly caused the demise of the human race several times.
It is something we should study as much as we can and prevent as much as we can, and with the 'chaotic' variable called man affecting the climate, the study and monitoring is needed now more than ever.
Earth killer!
"I shall expect a chemical cure for psychopathic behavior by 10 A.M. tomorrow, or I'll have your guts for spaghetti." -- a comic panel by Cotham


text:
Should I be worried?
Dec 14, 2012
Hi, i was recently tested HIV positive on September 2012 and my CD4 count was 628. However, the lymph nodes around my neck, under jaw, even they exist on my right collar bone area. Doctor said it is a common symptom, just need to observe the size of the swollen lymp nodes. Honestly, the amount is increasing! And I'm getting more and more worried. Here in Malaysia, only government hospital treats HIV patient, the efficiency and the service is quite poor.
i am writing to ask, swollen lymph nodes means they are producing antibody to fight against the HIV virus, will my swollen lymph nodes go back to its normal size? Any other medicine that I can use right now to reduce my swollen lymph nodes, as I have CD4 628, HIV med isn't my choice for now. What else can I do to make sure the swollen lymp nodes go away...? Please advise.. Should I be worried about this symptoms? It has been swelling for 3 months and more now.. From under jaw to side of my neck and now collar bone area...
Response from Mr. Vergel
You only recently started taking HIV medications.
This problem tends to improve, but you have to give it time. However, if you think the swelling really gets worse and worrisome after the first 6 months, talk to your doctor. Lymphoma is not too common in HIV but it can happen to a minority of patients (even those with undetectable HIV viral load).
Immune activation and inflammatory responses are high when we have high viral load and could be even higher during the first months of therapy, but they tend to decrease as weeks go by with effective antiretrovirals. Also, it takes a while for HIV reservoirs in lymph nodes to decrease (some work looking at this has been presented lately in conferences).
Other viruses can also cause enlarged lymph nodes (Epstein Barr, herpes, etc)
I had enlarged lymph nodes in my neck and groin area for a few months after I finally got to undetectable viral load at the end of a 25 year exposure to HIV. It took a few months to have their size decrease. But some still remain easily by palpation even after 3 years of undectectable viral load.
I am glad you started HIV treatment!
I hope this helps!
Get Email Notifications When This Forum Updates or Subscribe With RSS
This forum is designed for educational purposes only, and experts are not rendering medical, mental health, legal or other professional advice or services. If you have or suspect you may have a medical, mental health, legal or other problem that requires advice, consult your own caregiver, attorney or other qualified professional.
Experts appearing on this page are independent and are solely responsible for editing and fact-checking their material. Neither TheBody.com nor any advertiser is the publisher or speaker of posted visitors' questions or the experts' material.
Review our complete terms of use and copyright notice.


text:
NASHVILLE, N.C. (AP) - Some Nash County residents are still worried about a proposed chicken processing plant that would employee 1,100 workers.
The county commission agreed Tuesday to meet with a University of North Carolina expert before making a final decision on incentives for the plant. Epidemiology professor Steve Wing has researched occupational and environmental impacts of industrial animal production.
The incentive package would give Sanderson Farms land valued at $1.2 million and annual cash payments worth nearly 40 percent of the property taxes paid by the company on all buildings, improvements and equipment each year for 15 years.
The company will invest $91 million and create 1,100 jobs within two years.
The city of Wilson and concerned landowners sued Nash County to try to block the plant, but a court rejected the challenge.
Despite opposition, Sanderson Farms says it will build new facilities in Nash County.
Sanderson made the announcement this morning, saying their new poultry processing plant and hatchery will provide 1,100 new jobs.
Area residents and the city of Wilson sued Nash County several years ago over fears the plant would cause environmental damage. Last week the state Court of Appeals upheld a judge's ruling that Wilson had no standing to challenge Nash County's rezoning of the site.
The Nash County Landowners Association says the project was already a done deal made in the backrooms before the public knew about it.
"The Nash County Landowners Association will continue to oppose any effort by this split Board of Commissioners to locate a slaughterhouse in our front yard. The environmental costs are just too high. The voters have clearly spoken by electing slaughterhouse opponents in both the Democratic and Republican primaries. The current majority is trying to hurry and push this through before the new board is seated later this year," said a news release from the association.
Sanderson says the poultry processing plant will be built on 140 acres near the interchange of Highway 97 and I-95. The hatchery will be located near the intersections of Highways 97 and 58. Total investment will be $91.4 million.
The processing plant and hatchery operation is expected to employ workers from the Nash, Wilson and Edgecombe County area.
Sanderson already has similar facilities in Kinston.


text: Oh, if I never do another good thing in my life, I have the pleasure of knowing that because of this post people world-wide took the time to muse over their love for their dogs, the joy of smelling their paws, and had a laugh. And for a brief moment, even allowed a few of us to stop and smell the roses; or... manure??!! Sometimes the simplest, silly of topics do cause us to pause and contemplate the deeper meaning of life!! LOL!