Got this from my friend (not to be named yet)
Micro-Waved Water -
A 26-year old guy decided to have a cup of coffee. He took a cup of water and put it in the microwave to heat it up (something that he had done numerous times before).
I am not sure how long he set the timer for, but he told me he wanted to bring the water to a boil. When the timer shut the oven off, he removed the cup from the oven. As he looked into the cup, he noted that the water was not boiling, but instantly the water in the cup 'blew up' into his face.
The cup remained intact until he threw it out of his hand but all the water had flown out into his face due to the build up of energy. His whole face is blistered and he has 1st and 2nd degree burns to his face, which may leave scarring. He also may have lost partial sight in his left eye. While at the hospital, the doctor who was attending to him stated that this is fairly common occurrence and water (alone) should never be heated in a microwave oven. If water is heated in this manner, something should be placed in the cup to diffuse the energy such as: a wooden stir stick, tea bag, etc. It is however a much safer choice to boil the water in a tea kettle.
General Electric's (GE) response:
Thanks for contacting us. I will be happy to assist you. The e- mail that you received is correct. Micro waved water and other liquids do not always bubble when they reach the boiling point. They can actually get superheated and not bubble at all. The superheated liquid will bubble up out of the cup when it is moved or when something like a spoon or teabag is put into it. To prevent this from happening and causing injury, do not heat any liquid for more than two minutes per cup.
After heating, let the cup stand in the microwave for thirty seconds before moving it or adding anything into it.
If you pass this on .. you could very well save someone from a lot of pain and suffering.
Thursday, January 29, 2009
What makes world leaders think George Bush loves nut pastries, reads poetry and plays the harp?
Alexander Chancellor: What makes world leaders think George Bush loves nut pastries, reads poetry and plays the harp?
via Latest news, sport, business, comment and reviews from the Guardian | guardian.co.uk by Alexander Chancellor on 1/29/09
This week, as it is required to do by law, the US state department published a list of all the presents given by foreigners in 2007 to President George Bush. It was an enormous list, running to hundreds of items, and remarkable also for the consistently unappealing nature of the gifts. I can honestly say that I didn't covet any of them.
It might be thought surprising that foreign leaders still give the US president any presents at all, given the lack of grace with which they are received. They are accepted only on the grounds that "non-acceptance would cause embarrassment to donor and US government", and the donors can be sure that hardly any of them will ever reach their intended destination. For the president is allowed to keep only gifts valued at under $335 for his personal use; the rest are regarded as gifts to the people of the US, from whom the president must buy them, if he wants them, at the market price. However, ever since that first Christmas in Bethlehem, potentates have wanted to show deference to their superiors by bearing them gifts, and it seems that nothing can cure this compulsion - not even the knowledge that it is all money down the drain. Yet you might still expect rather more intelligence and imagination from the world's leaders in their choice of presents.
You would think, for example, that before deciding to give Bush a £150 box of Charbonnel et Walker chocolates, Gordon Brown would have borne in mind that the American secret service requires the destruction of all food gifts to the president. However, Brown was not alone in this. The prime minister of Qatar gave Bush a large tin of "chocolates, fruits and cookies" worth £650, and the Iraqi president gave an "assortment of nut pastries", but these, too, in the words of the state department, were "handled pursuant to secret service policy" (ie destroyed). The same sad fate befell the £3 worth of "live shamrocks" given to Bush by the then Irish prime minister, Bertie Ahern, on St Patrick's Day.
Bush would have been allowed to keep another of Brown's gifts - a "green, beige and red plaid lambswool blanket" - because it is worth so little; but it has ended up all the same in a government warehouse, as has a present from Tony Blair (a Wedgwood bowl inscribed with the words "Am I not a man and a brother?", the slogan of the 19th-century British anti-slavery movement). If it is difficult to imagine what either British prime minister intended with these gifts, it is even harder to guess what was in the mind of Vladimir Putin when he gave Bush a book of "English Sonnets, 16th to 19th century", which he obviously would never read, and utterly mystifying why the president of Vietnam gave him an electric harp, which he most definitely would never play.
I clearly still have a great deal to learn about the workings of international diplomacy.
via Latest news, sport, business, comment and reviews from the Guardian | guardian.co.uk by Alexander Chancellor on 1/29/09
This week, as it is required to do by law, the US state department published a list of all the presents given by foreigners in 2007 to President George Bush. It was an enormous list, running to hundreds of items, and remarkable also for the consistently unappealing nature of the gifts. I can honestly say that I didn't covet any of them.
It might be thought surprising that foreign leaders still give the US president any presents at all, given the lack of grace with which they are received. They are accepted only on the grounds that "non-acceptance would cause embarrassment to donor and US government", and the donors can be sure that hardly any of them will ever reach their intended destination. For the president is allowed to keep only gifts valued at under $335 for his personal use; the rest are regarded as gifts to the people of the US, from whom the president must buy them, if he wants them, at the market price. However, ever since that first Christmas in Bethlehem, potentates have wanted to show deference to their superiors by bearing them gifts, and it seems that nothing can cure this compulsion - not even the knowledge that it is all money down the drain. Yet you might still expect rather more intelligence and imagination from the world's leaders in their choice of presents.
You would think, for example, that before deciding to give Bush a £150 box of Charbonnel et Walker chocolates, Gordon Brown would have borne in mind that the American secret service requires the destruction of all food gifts to the president. However, Brown was not alone in this. The prime minister of Qatar gave Bush a large tin of "chocolates, fruits and cookies" worth £650, and the Iraqi president gave an "assortment of nut pastries", but these, too, in the words of the state department, were "handled pursuant to secret service policy" (ie destroyed). The same sad fate befell the £3 worth of "live shamrocks" given to Bush by the then Irish prime minister, Bertie Ahern, on St Patrick's Day.
Bush would have been allowed to keep another of Brown's gifts - a "green, beige and red plaid lambswool blanket" - because it is worth so little; but it has ended up all the same in a government warehouse, as has a present from Tony Blair (a Wedgwood bowl inscribed with the words "Am I not a man and a brother?", the slogan of the 19th-century British anti-slavery movement). If it is difficult to imagine what either British prime minister intended with these gifts, it is even harder to guess what was in the mind of Vladimir Putin when he gave Bush a book of "English Sonnets, 16th to 19th century", which he obviously would never read, and utterly mystifying why the president of Vietnam gave him an electric harp, which he most definitely would never play.
I clearly still have a great deal to learn about the workings of international diplomacy.
A Visit From God!
A Visit From God!
By Chris Oyakhilome (Ph.D)
Many people today are in dire need of a change which only God could handle. They’ve probably heard about how God showed up in some other person’s situation, and this makes them wonder, ‘What about me?’ ‘When will God ever meet my need?’ But God is real and He does visit.
God is omnipresent; His presence fills everywhere; yet He does come and go, in spite of His omnipresence. This is because though His presence is everywhere; His manifested presence is not everywhere. So God does visit.
A Strong Desire
There’s an inspiring story of a woman in the book of 1 Samuel 1:1-21, named Hannah. Her story reveals God’s personality, faithfulness and kindness. Hannah had no child because she was barren. She had been in this situation for many years, and no physician could help her. So, she knew God was the only one who could help her; her situation couldn’t be reversed by man’s power or ability. The situation was a bit bearable for her because her husband loved her very much, her condition notwithstanding. Moreover, she got a worthy portion of offering to sacrifice to God at Shiloh - the annual place of worship. On a particular occasion, while the whole family was on their way to worship and offer sacrifices to God at Shiloh, her rival, Peninnah, goaded her with her condition. This made her very sad and desperate and her countenance fell. This time, her husband’s efforts to encourage her were all to no avail. By the time they arrived at Shiloh, her desire for a child was so strong, that the Bible says,
“And she was in bitterness of soul, and prayed unto the Lord, and wept sore.” (1 Samuel 1:10)
Hannah had a strong desire now for a change. When God visits you, the first thing you’ll discover is a strong desire for change.
There is a promise of a higher realm of life for you regardless of where you are presently. God’s Word is His promise to you, and it’s a place of rest. When you let Him visit you, He will carry you there. You need the visitation of God in order to move to this realm of life, but first you need that desire. You are God’s child but you have an enemy, the devil, who will do everything to keep you from getting what is yours.
Do you want a change? Do you want the power of the kingdom of God to produce results for you? Then your heart must reach out; you must be bursting with a strong desire. Strong desire is necessary in life. A compelling desire for a change is the starting place.
“ And David perceived that the Lord had established him king over Israel, and that he had exalted his kingdom for his people Israel’s sake.” (2 Samuel 5:12)
Isn’t this amazing? David had been king for several years already. Then one day, while sitting on his throne, it dawned on him that God had actually established him as king over Israel and exalted his kingdom.
I’m sure something like this has happened to you before; you were looking for a pen to use and it suddenly dawned on you, you had one in your pocket, all the while.
There are times you don’t have something but because you don’t really have any desire for it, it might not occur to you that you need it. All of a sudden, the need dawns on you, and from that point your desire for it begins to increase. Hannah had probably made up a lot of excuses in her heart for her condition, thinking, “The God of Abraham will visit me one day.” She must have tried to console herself that everything was okay except that she didn’t have a child. But it got to a time that she couldn’t take it anymore, it dawned on her, just like David, that she needed a miracle. She knew she didn’t want to live the rest of her life without a child.
The same thing happened to the children of Israel in Egypt. It wasn’t until they didn’t have enough to eat and the whips of the Egyptian taskmasters landed on their backs that God’s promise occurred to them (Exodus 2:23-25). It dawned on them that a better land was waiting for them, where all the good things of life were freely available and they’d no longer be slaves.
Sometimes you find Christians in a desperate situation, just like Hannah’s, but they fail to recognize it. They have great need in their lives but fail to realize it. Until the need dawns on them, they may never recognise the solution or desire it.
You want a change? It’s got to dawn on you that God has prepared something better than where you are now. The first step to your miracle is to get uncomfortable with your present state!
When you discover that you have a strong desire for change, then God is at your door. The strong desire is the response of the human soul to God, as He knocks on the door of your heart. There’s something about the human soul; when your soul cries out in a strong desire, God immediately responds to it. God said, ‘before you call I’ll be there, before you ask, I’ll answer you’ (Isaiah 65:24).
Nourish Your Desire
What do you do with your desire? Let’s learn from David. David had an excellent reputation of seeking God’s Presence. God called him a man after His own heart (1 Samuel 13:14).“O God, thou art my God; early will I seek thee: my soul thirsteth for thee, my flesh longeth for thee in a dry and thirsty land, where no water is; To see thy power and thy glory, so as I have seen thee in the sanctuary.” (Psalms 63:1-2)
David said, ‘I have a strong desire within me to see your power, Oh God!’ He didn’t hunger and thirst for food and drink; he thirsted and hungered to see the power of God. If you don’t follow his writing carefully, you may erroneously think he just woke up one morning with this desire without doing anything, that is, without any effort on his own part. The secret of this longing and desire for God is in verse 6 of the same chapter, where he says,
“When I remember thee upon my bed, and meditate on thee in the night watches.” (Psalm 63:6) Can you see that? Even when he went to bed, he didn’t forget about God. He thought about Him all day and night, meditating on His Word. This wasn’t an accidental thought. No! It was a conscious thought and must have required some effort on his part. He deliberately and consciously nursed his desire for God! You can either nurse to increase your desire, or quench your desire. When that strong desire comes to your heart, nurse it, nourish it, and don’t let anything take it away from you. Let it grow stronger and stronger.
You’ll also discover that when you have a strong desire for something, more information will come to you about that thing. Then you’ll look up to God for answers. If you have a strong desire, let it work in you, don’t push it away.
By Chris Oyakhilome (Ph.D)
Many people today are in dire need of a change which only God could handle. They’ve probably heard about how God showed up in some other person’s situation, and this makes them wonder, ‘What about me?’ ‘When will God ever meet my need?’ But God is real and He does visit.
God is omnipresent; His presence fills everywhere; yet He does come and go, in spite of His omnipresence. This is because though His presence is everywhere; His manifested presence is not everywhere. So God does visit.
A Strong Desire
There’s an inspiring story of a woman in the book of 1 Samuel 1:1-21, named Hannah. Her story reveals God’s personality, faithfulness and kindness. Hannah had no child because she was barren. She had been in this situation for many years, and no physician could help her. So, she knew God was the only one who could help her; her situation couldn’t be reversed by man’s power or ability. The situation was a bit bearable for her because her husband loved her very much, her condition notwithstanding. Moreover, she got a worthy portion of offering to sacrifice to God at Shiloh - the annual place of worship. On a particular occasion, while the whole family was on their way to worship and offer sacrifices to God at Shiloh, her rival, Peninnah, goaded her with her condition. This made her very sad and desperate and her countenance fell. This time, her husband’s efforts to encourage her were all to no avail. By the time they arrived at Shiloh, her desire for a child was so strong, that the Bible says,
“And she was in bitterness of soul, and prayed unto the Lord, and wept sore.” (1 Samuel 1:10)
Hannah had a strong desire now for a change. When God visits you, the first thing you’ll discover is a strong desire for change.
There is a promise of a higher realm of life for you regardless of where you are presently. God’s Word is His promise to you, and it’s a place of rest. When you let Him visit you, He will carry you there. You need the visitation of God in order to move to this realm of life, but first you need that desire. You are God’s child but you have an enemy, the devil, who will do everything to keep you from getting what is yours.
Do you want a change? Do you want the power of the kingdom of God to produce results for you? Then your heart must reach out; you must be bursting with a strong desire. Strong desire is necessary in life. A compelling desire for a change is the starting place.
“ And David perceived that the Lord had established him king over Israel, and that he had exalted his kingdom for his people Israel’s sake.” (2 Samuel 5:12)
Isn’t this amazing? David had been king for several years already. Then one day, while sitting on his throne, it dawned on him that God had actually established him as king over Israel and exalted his kingdom.
I’m sure something like this has happened to you before; you were looking for a pen to use and it suddenly dawned on you, you had one in your pocket, all the while.
There are times you don’t have something but because you don’t really have any desire for it, it might not occur to you that you need it. All of a sudden, the need dawns on you, and from that point your desire for it begins to increase. Hannah had probably made up a lot of excuses in her heart for her condition, thinking, “The God of Abraham will visit me one day.” She must have tried to console herself that everything was okay except that she didn’t have a child. But it got to a time that she couldn’t take it anymore, it dawned on her, just like David, that she needed a miracle. She knew she didn’t want to live the rest of her life without a child.
The same thing happened to the children of Israel in Egypt. It wasn’t until they didn’t have enough to eat and the whips of the Egyptian taskmasters landed on their backs that God’s promise occurred to them (Exodus 2:23-25). It dawned on them that a better land was waiting for them, where all the good things of life were freely available and they’d no longer be slaves.
Sometimes you find Christians in a desperate situation, just like Hannah’s, but they fail to recognize it. They have great need in their lives but fail to realize it. Until the need dawns on them, they may never recognise the solution or desire it.
You want a change? It’s got to dawn on you that God has prepared something better than where you are now. The first step to your miracle is to get uncomfortable with your present state!
When you discover that you have a strong desire for change, then God is at your door. The strong desire is the response of the human soul to God, as He knocks on the door of your heart. There’s something about the human soul; when your soul cries out in a strong desire, God immediately responds to it. God said, ‘before you call I’ll be there, before you ask, I’ll answer you’ (Isaiah 65:24).
Nourish Your Desire
What do you do with your desire? Let’s learn from David. David had an excellent reputation of seeking God’s Presence. God called him a man after His own heart (1 Samuel 13:14).“O God, thou art my God; early will I seek thee: my soul thirsteth for thee, my flesh longeth for thee in a dry and thirsty land, where no water is; To see thy power and thy glory, so as I have seen thee in the sanctuary.” (Psalms 63:1-2)
David said, ‘I have a strong desire within me to see your power, Oh God!’ He didn’t hunger and thirst for food and drink; he thirsted and hungered to see the power of God. If you don’t follow his writing carefully, you may erroneously think he just woke up one morning with this desire without doing anything, that is, without any effort on his own part. The secret of this longing and desire for God is in verse 6 of the same chapter, where he says,
“When I remember thee upon my bed, and meditate on thee in the night watches.” (Psalm 63:6) Can you see that? Even when he went to bed, he didn’t forget about God. He thought about Him all day and night, meditating on His Word. This wasn’t an accidental thought. No! It was a conscious thought and must have required some effort on his part. He deliberately and consciously nursed his desire for God! You can either nurse to increase your desire, or quench your desire. When that strong desire comes to your heart, nurse it, nourish it, and don’t let anything take it away from you. Let it grow stronger and stronger.
You’ll also discover that when you have a strong desire for something, more information will come to you about that thing. Then you’ll look up to God for answers. If you have a strong desire, let it work in you, don’t push it away.
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
Riding in the car with Engineers
I had the most exciting ride home yesterday.
First, we had to wait for a guy who was delayed by his supervisor. The first time he was called, he said he was shutting down his system. That got us talking about similar incidents. The owner of the car told us of a guy that told him he was already downstairs, coming towards the car. The car owner then decided to quickly ease himself and all that. After spending about 20 minutes doing that, he came out and called the other guy, who told him he was still on his way. In annoyance, the car owner said he left the other guy. My question is this, why do we tend to behave like that.
The guy we were waiting for finally came and we got on to talking about being a J.J.C (Johnny just come in Lagos). The representative J.J.C in our midst let us into his experience trying to understand Lagos roads. He said the major reason for his confusion is that in most parts of Lagos, the road travelled to get to a place is not necessarily the same as the return route. He was supported by former J.J.Cs who have finally acclimatized. What do you think? is the Lagos road network complicated? My major challenge with Lagos is that there are too many people in a hurry (going nowhere, of course).
Then one of the guys got a call from someone who wanted to see him. We got on to talking about people who only remember you at month end. One of the guys said he always escapes them by telling them he is 'offshore' whenever they call him. (So, if your engineer relative, friend etc tells u he's offshore at month end, he/she may just be escaping from you, lol). One of them brought up the story of a man whose wife 'suddenly' put to bed, wondering if 9 months is not enough notice for one to plan.
Those were the high points of my 'Ride in the Car with Engineers' yesterday. Clearly one of the liveliest rides I've had.
Have a nice day!
First, we had to wait for a guy who was delayed by his supervisor. The first time he was called, he said he was shutting down his system. That got us talking about similar incidents. The owner of the car told us of a guy that told him he was already downstairs, coming towards the car. The car owner then decided to quickly ease himself and all that. After spending about 20 minutes doing that, he came out and called the other guy, who told him he was still on his way. In annoyance, the car owner said he left the other guy. My question is this, why do we tend to behave like that.
The guy we were waiting for finally came and we got on to talking about being a J.J.C (Johnny just come in Lagos). The representative J.J.C in our midst let us into his experience trying to understand Lagos roads. He said the major reason for his confusion is that in most parts of Lagos, the road travelled to get to a place is not necessarily the same as the return route. He was supported by former J.J.Cs who have finally acclimatized. What do you think? is the Lagos road network complicated? My major challenge with Lagos is that there are too many people in a hurry (going nowhere, of course).
Then one of the guys got a call from someone who wanted to see him. We got on to talking about people who only remember you at month end. One of the guys said he always escapes them by telling them he is 'offshore' whenever they call him. (So, if your engineer relative, friend etc tells u he's offshore at month end, he/she may just be escaping from you, lol). One of them brought up the story of a man whose wife 'suddenly' put to bed, wondering if 9 months is not enough notice for one to plan.
Those were the high points of my 'Ride in the Car with Engineers' yesterday. Clearly one of the liveliest rides I've had.
Have a nice day!
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
What do you think about this database?
What do you think about this database?
ContactPoint, controversial children's database launched to help those at risk
via Latest news, sport, business, comment and reviews from the Guardian | guardian.co.uk by Jessica Shepherd on 1/26/09
Doctors, social workers and police can look up details on every child in England on a controversial database from today.
The £224m directory, called ContactPoint, holds the name, address, date of birth, GP and school of all under-18s, and is aimed at helping professionals reach children they suspect are at risk. It aims to prevent children falling into gaps between different services and was set up in response to an inquiry into the murder of Victoria Climbié in 2000.
Victoria, 8, was tortured to death by her great-aunt and her great-aunt's boyfriend. Police, doctors and social workers had been in contact with her while she was being abused.
Before today, if a social worker or police officer believed a child was at risk, there was no immediate way of knowing whether other services had been in contact with the child.
The database will not hold information on a child's suspected abuse or family history, and will be impossible to download.
But it has attracted controversy from the outset, with civil liberties groups, children's campaigners and the Information Commissioner concerned about its scope and role.
The Association of Directors of Children's Services (ADCS) wrote to officials in 2007 outlining "significant" concerns about the database. Richard Stiff, the ADCS chair of information systems and technology policy committee, said confusion over who is responsible for vetting users and policing the system "may allow a situation where an abuser could be able to access ContactPoint for illegitimate purposes with limited fear of any repercussions".
The children's secretary, Ed Balls, who announced the launch of the database today, said it would help those who work with children to "prevent problems escalating". He said recent cases had shown that a lack of "proper and timely information-sharing" could have tragic consequences.
Its launch comes after the death of 17-month-old boy Baby P in August 2007, who suffered a catalogue of abuse at the hands of his mother and her boyfriend. Baby P was on an at-risk register and had been seen some 60 times by social workers, doctors and welfare groups.
Balls said: "No system can ever guarantee that all children will be safe but we know ContactPoint will make a real difference."
The Liberal Democrats have called for the "intrusive" database to be scrapped. The party's children's spokesman, David Laws, said: "The fact that the rollout has already been delayed because of technical issues does not bode well for the future. The government has shown it can't be trusted with sensitive data. Parents have every right to demand that their children's personal details are not put at risk."
Lord Laming, who chaired the Victoria Climbié inquiry, said ContactPoint would not replace the need for children's services organisations to ensure "effective working across teams, across services and agencies, including sharing information where this is appropriate". But he added: "In time I believe ContactPoint will be an important tool in supporting this practice, helping practitioners to know who else is working with a particular child, and therefore contributing to the armoury of measures that we need to support children's services in making sure children in England are safe and well."
Martin Narey, chief executive of Barnardo's, said: "Barnardo's is very supportive of ContactPoint and encouraged by the progress made. We believe that the directory will provide a quick way for authorised professionals to find out who else is working with a child; making it easier to deliver more coordinated and better services, and helping us better to identify children of particular vulnerability."
ContactPoint, controversial children's database launched to help those at risk
via Latest news, sport, business, comment and reviews from the Guardian | guardian.co.uk by Jessica Shepherd on 1/26/09
Doctors, social workers and police can look up details on every child in England on a controversial database from today.
The £224m directory, called ContactPoint, holds the name, address, date of birth, GP and school of all under-18s, and is aimed at helping professionals reach children they suspect are at risk. It aims to prevent children falling into gaps between different services and was set up in response to an inquiry into the murder of Victoria Climbié in 2000.
Victoria, 8, was tortured to death by her great-aunt and her great-aunt's boyfriend. Police, doctors and social workers had been in contact with her while she was being abused.
Before today, if a social worker or police officer believed a child was at risk, there was no immediate way of knowing whether other services had been in contact with the child.
The database will not hold information on a child's suspected abuse or family history, and will be impossible to download.
But it has attracted controversy from the outset, with civil liberties groups, children's campaigners and the Information Commissioner concerned about its scope and role.
The Association of Directors of Children's Services (ADCS) wrote to officials in 2007 outlining "significant" concerns about the database. Richard Stiff, the ADCS chair of information systems and technology policy committee, said confusion over who is responsible for vetting users and policing the system "may allow a situation where an abuser could be able to access ContactPoint for illegitimate purposes with limited fear of any repercussions".
The children's secretary, Ed Balls, who announced the launch of the database today, said it would help those who work with children to "prevent problems escalating". He said recent cases had shown that a lack of "proper and timely information-sharing" could have tragic consequences.
Its launch comes after the death of 17-month-old boy Baby P in August 2007, who suffered a catalogue of abuse at the hands of his mother and her boyfriend. Baby P was on an at-risk register and had been seen some 60 times by social workers, doctors and welfare groups.
Balls said: "No system can ever guarantee that all children will be safe but we know ContactPoint will make a real difference."
The Liberal Democrats have called for the "intrusive" database to be scrapped. The party's children's spokesman, David Laws, said: "The fact that the rollout has already been delayed because of technical issues does not bode well for the future. The government has shown it can't be trusted with sensitive data. Parents have every right to demand that their children's personal details are not put at risk."
Lord Laming, who chaired the Victoria Climbié inquiry, said ContactPoint would not replace the need for children's services organisations to ensure "effective working across teams, across services and agencies, including sharing information where this is appropriate". But he added: "In time I believe ContactPoint will be an important tool in supporting this practice, helping practitioners to know who else is working with a particular child, and therefore contributing to the armoury of measures that we need to support children's services in making sure children in England are safe and well."
Martin Narey, chief executive of Barnardo's, said: "Barnardo's is very supportive of ContactPoint and encouraged by the progress made. We believe that the directory will provide a quick way for authorised professionals to find out who else is working with a child; making it easier to deliver more coordinated and better services, and helping us better to identify children of particular vulnerability."
Wikipedia editors may approve all changes
via Latest news, sport, business, comment and reviews from the Guardian | guardian.co.uk by Bobbie Johnson on 1/26/09
Wikipedia faces a revolt among thousands of its contributors over proposals to change the way the online encyclopedia is run.
Until now, Wikipedia has allowed anybody to make instant changes to almost all of its 2.7m entries, with only a handful of entries protected from being altered.
But under proposals put forward by the website's co-founder Jimmy Wales, many future changes to the site would need to be approved by a group of editors before going live.
Wales argues the scheme will bring greater accuracy, particularly in articles referring to living people. But the possibility has caused a furore among Wikipedia users, since many see it as a fundamental change to the egalitarian nature of the site.
A user poll on the website suggests 60% are in favour of trials, which could take place within the next few weeks. But some think the split could ultimately threaten the future of the site.
"The big issue is that while we have majority support, we don't have consensus, and that's the way we have always made our decisions," said Jake Wartenberg. "A lot of editors are becoming disenchanted with the project; we are losing them all the time."
Such changes have been considered before, but were brought into focus last week when Wikipedia falsely announced that two prominent US politicians had died.
On the day of Barack Obama's inauguration, the site reported the deaths of West Virginia's Robert Byrd - the longest-serving senator in American history - and Ted Kennedy, who has been diagnosed with a brain tumour and collapsed during the inaugural lunch.
Both reports were false, and Wikipedia quickly changed the site back to reflect the truth, but the situation drove Wales to push strongly for change.
"This nonsense would have been 100% prevented by flagged revisions," he wrote on the site. "This was a breaking news story and we want people to be able to participate [but] we have a tool available now that is consistent with higher quality."
The technical system that allows Wikipedia to run in this way was released last summer and has already been put into place on the German version of the website. But German editors have decided that changes will not be approved for around three weeks - a timescale which Wales suggests would be "unacceptable" for the English-language site.
It would not be the first major change in the way the site, ranked as the world's seventh largest by traffic analysis tool Alexa, operates. In 2005, Wikipedia said it was going to prevent anonymous users from creating entries as a way of stopping cyber-bullying and vandalism.
That change was also spurred by a political controversy, in which prominent journalist and Democratic party aide John Siegenthaler discovered that an anonymous user had written a biography of him which alleged that he was involved in the assassinations of John and Robert Kennedy in the 1960s.
Wikipedia has also locked down a number of controversial articles in order to prevent long-running "edit wars".
If the site grants new powers to editors, it would bring Wikipedia even closer to traditional encyclopedia websites such as Britannica, which last week announced that it would be launching a new online version that would allow readers to submit their own updates to entries. That change came after a bitter war of words, following a 2005 study by science journal Nature that found Wikipedia and Britannica were often comparable for accuracy - and in some cases, Wikipedia won.
Wikipedia faces a revolt among thousands of its contributors over proposals to change the way the online encyclopedia is run.
Until now, Wikipedia has allowed anybody to make instant changes to almost all of its 2.7m entries, with only a handful of entries protected from being altered.
But under proposals put forward by the website's co-founder Jimmy Wales, many future changes to the site would need to be approved by a group of editors before going live.
Wales argues the scheme will bring greater accuracy, particularly in articles referring to living people. But the possibility has caused a furore among Wikipedia users, since many see it as a fundamental change to the egalitarian nature of the site.
A user poll on the website suggests 60% are in favour of trials, which could take place within the next few weeks. But some think the split could ultimately threaten the future of the site.
"The big issue is that while we have majority support, we don't have consensus, and that's the way we have always made our decisions," said Jake Wartenberg. "A lot of editors are becoming disenchanted with the project; we are losing them all the time."
Such changes have been considered before, but were brought into focus last week when Wikipedia falsely announced that two prominent US politicians had died.
On the day of Barack Obama's inauguration, the site reported the deaths of West Virginia's Robert Byrd - the longest-serving senator in American history - and Ted Kennedy, who has been diagnosed with a brain tumour and collapsed during the inaugural lunch.
Both reports were false, and Wikipedia quickly changed the site back to reflect the truth, but the situation drove Wales to push strongly for change.
"This nonsense would have been 100% prevented by flagged revisions," he wrote on the site. "This was a breaking news story and we want people to be able to participate [but] we have a tool available now that is consistent with higher quality."
The technical system that allows Wikipedia to run in this way was released last summer and has already been put into place on the German version of the website. But German editors have decided that changes will not be approved for around three weeks - a timescale which Wales suggests would be "unacceptable" for the English-language site.
It would not be the first major change in the way the site, ranked as the world's seventh largest by traffic analysis tool Alexa, operates. In 2005, Wikipedia said it was going to prevent anonymous users from creating entries as a way of stopping cyber-bullying and vandalism.
That change was also spurred by a political controversy, in which prominent journalist and Democratic party aide John Siegenthaler discovered that an anonymous user had written a biography of him which alleged that he was involved in the assassinations of John and Robert Kennedy in the 1960s.
Wikipedia has also locked down a number of controversial articles in order to prevent long-running "edit wars".
If the site grants new powers to editors, it would bring Wikipedia even closer to traditional encyclopedia websites such as Britannica, which last week announced that it would be launching a new online version that would allow readers to submit their own updates to entries. That change came after a bitter war of words, following a 2005 study by science journal Nature that found Wikipedia and Britannica were often comparable for accuracy - and in some cases, Wikipedia won.
What is a Refinery?
Inside a maze of silver towers and pipes is a fascinating factory that changes hydrocarbon molecules to make gasoline.
A refinery is a factory. Just as a paper mill turns lumber into legal pads or a glassworks turns silica into stemware, a refinery takes a raw material--crude oil--and transforms it into gasoline and hundreds of other useful products.
A typical large refinery costs billions of dollars to build and millions more to maintain and upgrade. It runs around the clock 365 days a year, employs between 1,000 and 2,000 people and occupies as much land as several hundred football fields. It's so big and sprawling, in fact, that workers ride bicycles from one station to another.
In 1876, company pioneers used wagons and mules to haul two primitive stills to a spot near Pico Canyon, Calif., the site of California's first producing oil wells. The stills, each about the size of a garage, were used to heat oil at the prodigious rate of 25 to 40 barrels a day. This "oil boiling" produced kerosene, lubricants, waxes and gasoline--a clear, lightweight liquid that generally was discarded as a useless byproduct.
Gasoline's lowly status rose quickly after 1892, when Charles Duryea built the first U.S. gas-powered automobile. From then on, the light stuff from crude oil became the right stuff.
Today, some refineries can turn more than half of every 42-gallon barrel of crude oil into gasoline. That's a remarkable technological improvement from 70 years ago, when only 11 gallons of gasoline could be produced. How does this transformation take place? Essentially, refining breaks crude oil down into its various components, which then are selectively reconfigured into new products.
This process takes place inside a maze of hardware that one observer has likened to "a metal spaghetti factory." Employees regulate refinery operations from within highly automated control rooms. Because so much activity happens out of sight, refineries are surprisingly quiet places. The only sound most visitors hear is the constant, low hum of heavy equipment.
The complexity of this equipment varies from one refinery to the next. In general, the more sophisticated a refinery, the better its ability to upgrade crude oil into high-value products. Whether simple or complex, however, all refineries perform three basic steps: separation, conversion and treatment.
Modern separation--which is not terribly different from the "cooking" methods used at the Pico Canyon stills--involves piping oil through hot furnaces. The resulting liquids and vapors are discharged into distillation towers, the tall, narrow columns that give refineries their distinctive skylines.
Inside the towers, the liquids and vapors separate into components or fractions according to weight and boiling point. The lightest fractions, including gasoline and liquid petroleum gas (LPG), vaporize and rise to the top of the tower, where they condense back to liquids. Medium weight liquids, including kerosene and diesel oil distillates, stay in the middle. Heavier liquids, called gas oils, separate lower down, while the heaviest fractions with the highest boiling points settle at the bottom. These tarlike fractions, called residuum, are literally the "bottom of the barrel."
The fractions now are ready for piping to the next station or plant within the refinery. Some components require relatively little additional processing to become asphalt base or jet fuel. However, most molecules that are destined to become high-value products require much more processing.
Conversion: cracking and rearranging molecules to add value
This is where refining's fanciest footwork takes place--where fractions from the distillation towers are transformed into streams (intermediate components) that eventually become finished products. This also is where a refinery makes money, because only through conversion can most low-value fractions become gasoline.
The most widely used conversion method is called cracking because it uses heat and pressure to "crack" heavy hydrocarbon molecules into lighter ones. A cracking unit consists of one or more tall, thick-walled, bullet-shaped reactors and a network of furnaces, heat exchangers and other vessels.
Fluid catalytic cracking, or "cat cracking," is the basic gasoline-making process. Using intense heat (about 1,000 degrees Fahrenheit), low pressure and a powdered catalyst (a substance that accelerates chemical reactions), the cat cracker can convert most relatively heavy fractions into smaller gasoline molecules.
Hydrocracking applies the same principles but uses a different catalyst, slightly lower temperatures, much greater pressure and hydrogen to obtain chemical reactions.
Some refineries also have cokers, which use heat and moderate pressure to turn residuum into lighter products and a hard, coallike substance that is used as an industrial fuel. Cokers are among the more peculiar-looking refinery structures. They resemble a series of giant drums with metal derricks on top.
Cracking and coking are not the only forms of conversion. Other refinery processes, instead of splitting molecules, rearrange them to add value. Alkylation, for example, makes gasoline components by combining some of the gaseous byproducts of cracking. The process, which essentially is cracking in reverse, takes place in a series of large, horizontal vessels and tall, skinny towers that loom above other refinery structures.
Reforming uses heat, moderate pressure and catalysts to turn naphtha, a light, relatively low-value fraction, into high-octane gasoline components.
Treatment: the finishing touch
A major portion of refining involves blending, purifying, fine-tuning and otherwise improving products to meet these requirements.
Refinery technicians carefully combine a variety of streams from the processing units. Among the variables that determine the blend are octane level, vapor pressure ratings and special considerations, such as whether the gasoline will be used at high altitudes. Technicians also add performance additive, and dyes that distinguish the various grades of fuel.
Refining has come a long way since the oil boiling days of Pico Canyon. By the time a gallon of gasoline is pumped into a car's tank, it contains more than 200 hydrocarbons and additives. All that changing of molecules pays off in a product that ensures smooth, high-performance driving.
Of course these days, there are concerns about the environmental effects of petroleum based energy products. That is the topic of another post.
A refinery is a factory. Just as a paper mill turns lumber into legal pads or a glassworks turns silica into stemware, a refinery takes a raw material--crude oil--and transforms it into gasoline and hundreds of other useful products.
A typical large refinery costs billions of dollars to build and millions more to maintain and upgrade. It runs around the clock 365 days a year, employs between 1,000 and 2,000 people and occupies as much land as several hundred football fields. It's so big and sprawling, in fact, that workers ride bicycles from one station to another.
In 1876, company pioneers used wagons and mules to haul two primitive stills to a spot near Pico Canyon, Calif., the site of California's first producing oil wells. The stills, each about the size of a garage, were used to heat oil at the prodigious rate of 25 to 40 barrels a day. This "oil boiling" produced kerosene, lubricants, waxes and gasoline--a clear, lightweight liquid that generally was discarded as a useless byproduct.
Gasoline's lowly status rose quickly after 1892, when Charles Duryea built the first U.S. gas-powered automobile. From then on, the light stuff from crude oil became the right stuff.
Today, some refineries can turn more than half of every 42-gallon barrel of crude oil into gasoline. That's a remarkable technological improvement from 70 years ago, when only 11 gallons of gasoline could be produced. How does this transformation take place? Essentially, refining breaks crude oil down into its various components, which then are selectively reconfigured into new products.
This process takes place inside a maze of hardware that one observer has likened to "a metal spaghetti factory." Employees regulate refinery operations from within highly automated control rooms. Because so much activity happens out of sight, refineries are surprisingly quiet places. The only sound most visitors hear is the constant, low hum of heavy equipment.
The complexity of this equipment varies from one refinery to the next. In general, the more sophisticated a refinery, the better its ability to upgrade crude oil into high-value products. Whether simple or complex, however, all refineries perform three basic steps: separation, conversion and treatment.
Modern separation--which is not terribly different from the "cooking" methods used at the Pico Canyon stills--involves piping oil through hot furnaces. The resulting liquids and vapors are discharged into distillation towers, the tall, narrow columns that give refineries their distinctive skylines.
Inside the towers, the liquids and vapors separate into components or fractions according to weight and boiling point. The lightest fractions, including gasoline and liquid petroleum gas (LPG), vaporize and rise to the top of the tower, where they condense back to liquids. Medium weight liquids, including kerosene and diesel oil distillates, stay in the middle. Heavier liquids, called gas oils, separate lower down, while the heaviest fractions with the highest boiling points settle at the bottom. These tarlike fractions, called residuum, are literally the "bottom of the barrel."
The fractions now are ready for piping to the next station or plant within the refinery. Some components require relatively little additional processing to become asphalt base or jet fuel. However, most molecules that are destined to become high-value products require much more processing.
Conversion: cracking and rearranging molecules to add value
This is where refining's fanciest footwork takes place--where fractions from the distillation towers are transformed into streams (intermediate components) that eventually become finished products. This also is where a refinery makes money, because only through conversion can most low-value fractions become gasoline.
The most widely used conversion method is called cracking because it uses heat and pressure to "crack" heavy hydrocarbon molecules into lighter ones. A cracking unit consists of one or more tall, thick-walled, bullet-shaped reactors and a network of furnaces, heat exchangers and other vessels.
Fluid catalytic cracking, or "cat cracking," is the basic gasoline-making process. Using intense heat (about 1,000 degrees Fahrenheit), low pressure and a powdered catalyst (a substance that accelerates chemical reactions), the cat cracker can convert most relatively heavy fractions into smaller gasoline molecules.
Hydrocracking applies the same principles but uses a different catalyst, slightly lower temperatures, much greater pressure and hydrogen to obtain chemical reactions.
Some refineries also have cokers, which use heat and moderate pressure to turn residuum into lighter products and a hard, coallike substance that is used as an industrial fuel. Cokers are among the more peculiar-looking refinery structures. They resemble a series of giant drums with metal derricks on top.
Cracking and coking are not the only forms of conversion. Other refinery processes, instead of splitting molecules, rearrange them to add value. Alkylation, for example, makes gasoline components by combining some of the gaseous byproducts of cracking. The process, which essentially is cracking in reverse, takes place in a series of large, horizontal vessels and tall, skinny towers that loom above other refinery structures.
Reforming uses heat, moderate pressure and catalysts to turn naphtha, a light, relatively low-value fraction, into high-octane gasoline components.
Treatment: the finishing touch
A major portion of refining involves blending, purifying, fine-tuning and otherwise improving products to meet these requirements.
Refinery technicians carefully combine a variety of streams from the processing units. Among the variables that determine the blend are octane level, vapor pressure ratings and special considerations, such as whether the gasoline will be used at high altitudes. Technicians also add performance additive, and dyes that distinguish the various grades of fuel.
Refining has come a long way since the oil boiling days of Pico Canyon. By the time a gallon of gasoline is pumped into a car's tank, it contains more than 200 hydrocarbons and additives. All that changing of molecules pays off in a product that ensures smooth, high-performance driving.
Of course these days, there are concerns about the environmental effects of petroleum based energy products. That is the topic of another post.
9 Things....
9 Things I Dislike
1. People who point at their wrist while asking for the time.... I know where my watch is pal, where is yours?
2 People who are willing to get up to search the entire room for the T.V. remote because they refuse to walk to the T.V. and change the channel manually.
3 When people say "Oh you just want to have your cake and eat it too". Of course! What good is cake if you can't eat it?
4 When people say "it's always the last place you look". Of course it is. Why would you keep looking after you've found it? Do people do this? Who and where are they?
5 When people say while watching a film "did you see that?". No , I paid $12 to come to the cinema and stare at the floor!
6 People who ask "Can I ask you a question?".... Didn't really give me a choice there, did ya baby?
7. When something is 'new and improved!' Which is it? If it's new, then there has never been anything before it. If it's an improvement, then there must have been something before it, couldn't be new.
8 When people say "life is short". What?? Life is the longest thing anyone ever does!! What can you do that's longer?
9 When you are waiting for the bus and someone asks "Has the bus come yet?". If the bus came would I be standing here?
Have a wonderful day
Adios!
1. People who point at their wrist while asking for the time.... I know where my watch is pal, where is yours?
2 People who are willing to get up to search the entire room for the T.V. remote because they refuse to walk to the T.V. and change the channel manually.
3 When people say "Oh you just want to have your cake and eat it too". Of course! What good is cake if you can't eat it?
4 When people say "it's always the last place you look". Of course it is. Why would you keep looking after you've found it? Do people do this? Who and where are they?
5 When people say while watching a film "did you see that?". No , I paid $12 to come to the cinema and stare at the floor!
6 People who ask "Can I ask you a question?".... Didn't really give me a choice there, did ya baby?
7. When something is 'new and improved!' Which is it? If it's new, then there has never been anything before it. If it's an improvement, then there must have been something before it, couldn't be new.
8 When people say "life is short". What?? Life is the longest thing anyone ever does!! What can you do that's longer?
9 When you are waiting for the bus and someone asks "Has the bus come yet?". If the bus came would I be standing here?
Have a wonderful day
Adios!
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)