|
2009/3/26-4/2 [Uncategorized] UID:52755 Activity:nil |
3/26 "Over 50 million people voted for me and Sarah Palin -- mostly for Sarah Palin. --John McCain |
2009/3/26-4/2 [Recreation/Dating, Transportation/Airplane] UID:52756 Activity:moderate |
3/26 I've never been to Hawaii before, but I just booked a flight to Kauai for me and my gf (who has been to Oahu). I'd like some travel advice. Which side of the island to stay on, what not to miss, etc. \_ There's not a huge amount of choice as to "where to stay", it's a small island. Shell out the $$$$ for a helicopter ride over the island. Drive as far around the island as you can, too. I wasn't able to do much hiking 'cause of my girlfriend at the time, but I wish I had. You prob. don't need more than 3 days on a single island: consider a flight to The Big Island, which has awesome volcanos if you are there for more than 3 days. Inter-island flights run between $100 to $150. For stuff more specific than that, just look in guidebooks. \_ Hawaiian tourist helicopters crash and burn at an alarming rate. The pilots tend to be yahoos. My friends took a flight for their first anniversary. The pilot crashed it, and everyone died except my friend, who stayed alive in the wreckage with her dead husband until rescuers arrived. Being pinned under the wreckage is what was keeping her alive, as it turns out. When the moved stuff, she died. Helicopters are statistically the most unsafe way to fly with an engine. That doesn't stop me from heli-skiing, but in that activity the chopper is just a ski lift. The pilots don't fly you around to thrill you with the ride like those hawaiian tourist rides. \_ Man, I'm sorry to hear about your friend and her husband. \_ Actually, there's a massive amount of choice in where to stay. Megaresorts, small cottages, condos, private houses, budget motels, and so on. Then there's the question of which side of the island to stay on. If you are up in Hanalei then it's a long (2-3 hour) drive to Waimea. So I'm looking for someone who has been who can tell me if I should split the distance between the two or if more activities are concentrated in one area, etc. \_ Resorts vs. not would be up to you if you want those hotel amenities or not, I think. I think you can find better locations with private rentals. I'd get something on the waterfront though. Being up in a tall tower sucks, to me, regardless of the view. \_ There are no towers on Kauai. \_ A helicopter is good, but a light plane is better. They can cover more distance, which means getting into more isolated areas, and it's more comfortable to boot. Costs should be about the same for a given flight time, although you can probably get longer flights in a plane than a helicopter. \_ I am debating this. The plane is cheaper, but it cannot hover or get as close to the ground. Helicopters have had some bad crashes lately. I was first leaning to a plane, but now a helicopter (for the reasons above). I have no idea which is better w/o trying both. Have you been on both for a tour like this? \_ Take surfing/snorkling/scuba lessons. \_ Wear sunscreen, especially the first day. \_ A very good advice \_ On a serious note - stay in Koloa (south side of the island) where it is less rainy than the Princeville (north of the island) and Lihue (east side of the island). My wife and I married in the Koloa area - PLENTY of cheap but good condo (for $120/nite or less), and a lot quieter. Don't expect Kauai to have much of a nightlife like Maui (Lahaina) or Oahu (Waikiki), it is a family island (and the locals would like to keep it that way). Stay, enjoy the sceneries and behave! Check out NaPali coast (either via helicopter if you're brave, from a bumpy boat ride or by hiking - it's 2 day worth of hiking). Check out Duane's Ono Char-burger place, an island institution. Go get the "Blue Book" on Kauai, we swear by it everytime we go. |
2009/3/26 [Reference/Religion] UID:52757 Activity:nil |
3/35 Does Geithner want to play God or be God? \_ no |
2009/3/26-4/2 [Computer/SW/Database] UID:52758 Activity:nil |
3/26 I accidentally GRANT ALL to someone on mysql, is there an UNGRANT ALL command equivalent short of having to do a bunch of tedious UPDATE user priv1,priv2,... VALUES('n','n',...); FLUSH PRIVILEGES; ??? \_ nope \_ Remove and recreate the user? |
2009/3/26-4/2 [Health/Disease/General] UID:52759 Activity:kinda low |
3/26 world's luckiest man: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/how-i-survived-hiroshima-ndash-and-then-nagasaki-1654294.html \_ If you can see the white light, wouldn't you get exposed to enough deadly radiation to die? \_ Dying from cancer at age ninety-three, and more than six decades after the blasts, isn't exactly early death. \_ Of course not. Feynman even watched the first atomic blast without eye protection. The radiation that kills you is from energetic neutrons and alpha particles that are near the blast, and gets mixed with soil in a ground or low-altitude detonation. \_ Feynman had all kinds of great stories about his radiation experiences while a young man working on the Manhattan Project. He also came down with cancer quite young, like all those guys. \_ Someone told me great minds die young. Mozart, Mendelssohn, etc. We should scatter plot IQ vs. lifespan... I suspect lifespan is highest for IQ 130-150, and beyond 180 there's a fall-off due to odd reasons \_ Mozart and Beethoven get cited as geniuses who died young, but Bach is also wide regarded as a genius, and lived to the ripe old age of 65 before succumbing to either bad post-op or stroke, depending on which source you believe. \_ Dying from cancer at age ninety-three, and more than sixty years after the bombings, isn't exactly early death. How can it say it's "probably caused by the atomic bombs that almost killed him,"? Many people get cancer much earlier than age 93 even without exposing to nuclear blasts. \_ Not very lucky to be in two nuclear blasts. I'd call that very unlucky. |
2009/3/26-4/2 [Computer/SW/Languages/Misc, Computer/SW/Apps] UID:52760 Activity:nil |
3/26 Anyone here uses Heritrix? I'm trying to read the Intro document at http://crawler.archive.org/An%20Introduction%20to%20Heritrix.pdf but both Adobe Reader 8.1.3 (Win32) and gv 3.6.5 (cygwin) display error messages and show me blank pages. Adobe displays: "Cannot extract the embedded font 'FTXWSG+TimesNewRomanMS'. Some characters may not display or print correctly." "An error exists on this page. Acrobat may not display the page correctly. Please contace the person who created the PDF document to correct the problem." "Too few operands." Is anyone able to read this file? Thanks. |
2009/3/26-4/2 [Finance/Investment] UID:52761 Activity:kinda low |
3/26 Can someone explain the 14% gain described here. I don't understand the basic math being used. What if the portfolio returns 20%/yr? http://theweek.com/article/index/94743/The_crisis__and_Geithner_plan__explained \_ I don't think you can explain it without knowing what the split in profits between the government and private holders is. It's obviously not 50/50. It looks like maybe 85/15 to get the number Geithner quoted. This makes sense because they only contributed 7% to begin with. \_ My understanding was that it was a 50/50 split (at least on the up front money side) with the gubmnt putting up 7% and the private money=7%. The other 86 or 85% (maybe 7.5% above) is loans gauranteed by gubment, that are basically uncompensated. (Though there may be some premiums on the interest rates) \_ Can't be or the math doesn't work. If private money puts up 7% and the fund returns 10% then there won't be a 14% gain. The math works if the profit is split 85/15 after the government takes its share off the top. Are you saying its a 3 way split of 70/15/15? \_ I don't think you can explain it without knowing what the split in profits between the government and private holders is. It's obviously not 50/50. It looks like maybe 85/15 to get the number Geithner quoted. This makes sense because they only contributed 7% to begin with. \_ My understanding was that it was a 50/50 split (at least on the up front money side) with the gubmnt putting up 7% and the private money=7%. The other 86 or 85% (maybe 7.5% above) is loans gauranteed by gubment, that are basically uncompensated. (Though there may be some premiums on the interest rates) \_ Can't be or the math doesn't work. If private money puts up 7% and the fund returns 10% then there won't be a 14% gain. The math works if the profit is split 85/15 after the government takes its share off the top. Are you saying its a 3 way split of 70/15/15? \_ Here's the closest that I could come up with (all #s in $B): Return on 500 @ 9% = 45 @ 4% = 20 @ -1% = -5 3% FDIC Interest on 430 = 13 = 13 = 13 Gross Profit = 32 = 7 = -18 50% Treasury "Cut" = 16 = 3.5 = -3 2% PE "Mgmt Fee" = 10 = 0 = 10? PE Return = 6 = 3.5 = -25 % Return (Return/35) = 17% = 10% = -5/7 Can't figure out how to get to 14% (or really, the -5/7). Can't figure out how to get to 14% (or -5/7). |