bob_villa brought next idea :
On Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 12:45:13 AM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:

One of my favorite things to do is to brain storm about the 'why not'
or 'why can't it be done' or 'figure it out' kind of stuff.


"Brain storming" requires more than one...now I'm *really* starting to worry
about you! (ʘ言ʘ•¬)

I disagree. I think you are confusing brainstorming with think tank.

--
....
For long you live and high you fly
But only if you ride the tide
And balanced on the biggest wave
You race towards an early grave.

On Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 9:59:18 AM UTC-5, FromTheRafters wrote:
bob_villa brought next idea :
On Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 12:45:13 AM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:

One of my favorite things to do is to brain storm about the 'why not'
or 'why can't it be done' or 'figure it out' kind of stuff.


"Brain storming" requires more than one...now I'm *really* starting to worry
about you! (ʘ言ʘ•¬)

I disagree. I think you are confusing brainstorming with think tank.

--
...
For long you live and high you fly
But only if you ride the tide
And balanced on the biggest wave
You race towards an early grave.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/brainstorming

On 8/18/2015 4:13 AM, Don Y wrote:
On 8/17/2015 10:34 PM, Muggles wrote:

I have an electronic sewing machine. Wonderful machine. Used it a lot.
I like to think outside the box... Look at things differently. Do things
differently because I like 'possibilities' vs. the 'same'. One of my
favorite
things to do is to brain storm about the 'why not' or 'why can't it be
done' or
'figure it out' kind of stuff.

I prefer to ask "Why was it done *that* way, instead of some other
(possibly better) way?"

Another good question.

E.g., if you have a dishwasher, chances are, it's located near your
sink. And, if you look under the sink, you'll probably see hoses
coming to/from the dishwasher to "hookup" *under* the sink.

A colossal waste of space. And, this usually means the dishwasher
doesn't have the required air gap in the drain line!

The dishwasher, here, moves all the plumbing into the wall behind
the sink/dishwasher. Including the air gap. As a result, the
cabinet beneath the sink has no "extra pipes" to work around.

More space for storage, too.

You must have one of the most fun jobs out there. Imagine something,
and then find a way to design and build it!

Yes. I am blessed in that my job and hobby are one in the same.

There also seems to be more "value" to "making things" instead
of just "writing programs". Your sewing machine probably has
more value to you than any of the "programs" on your PC. It
*does* something.

It provided a long career, too.

I can assure you, it wasn't a "fun" experience! Had
the examiner opted to demand a *single* answer, I
don't know what the "right" answer would have
been. :

Awe... The examiner is missing the point. To see what someone else
tells you to see is what mindless drones can do, but to really SEE
is a gift.

I am lucky the examiner was flexible in this case. DMV
folks tend not to be known for their flexibility! There's
a reason the test is designed the way it is -- the applicant
is *supposed* to see ONE particular "number" in preference
to the others that are also hiding there.

Maybe the examiner couldn't see the other numbers?

*I* just couldn't figure out what the "right" number was
supposed to be! :

Time for Coupling...

--
Maggie

On 8/18/2015 6:10 AM, J Burns wrote:
On 8/16/15 2:48 PM, philo wrote:
On 08/16/2015 08:55 AM, J Burns wrote:
On 8/15/15 9:26 PM, Uncle Monster wrote:
When I was a kid, the treatment for ADD hyperactivity was regular
beatings.

School would have been okay if the teachers didn't talk in complete
sentences. By the time they finished the predicate, how was I supposed
to remember the subject?



Although I thought I got a crummy education from what I've seen with
*some* of the 30 year olds today...my education was not so bad.

Governor Richard Riley was US Secretary of Education from 1993 to 2001.
His department conducted nationwide testing of functional literacy. He
announced that Americans had more years of education than ever before in
history but were functionally less literate than ever before. His
solution was that Americans should spend their entire lives in school,
taking community-college courses if nothing else.

About 1840, affordable books were becoming common in America. The rate
of literacy was soaring because people were interested in what was in
the books they could buy or borrow. The ruling class found this access
to ideas, alarming. They reasoned that if kids were forced to learn to
read like prisoners, they would never be very interested in finding
meaning in published material. That was the purpose of compulsory
education. It worked. Literacy has never been as high as it was before.

School boards exercise censorship over what may be taught. Students also
exercise censorship through passive aggression.

The theory of education involves the lesson plan and the bell curve.
That means each question should be planned so that about 75% of the
students will answer as desired. If too many answer as desired, the
question is deemed too easy. If too few answer as desired, it's too
hard. By learning to think as a herd, successful students can generally
respond to challenging questions with hopeless confusion, causing those
questions to be discarded in favor of dumber material.

Imagine Marine drill instructors were proper teachers. All marching
commands involving left or right would be discarded: too confusing to
too many. A commanding general would be enraged to see a platoon march
flawlessly on graduation day. He'd bust their drill instructor down to
private. No more than 25% of a platoon should respond correctly to 90%
of commands. The purpose of education is to create winners and losers.
Allowing the whole platoon to perform as winners would be tantamount to
anarchy.

In his biography, Lewis Puller said he drank his way through college,
then decided to become a Marine officer. He wrote about getting through
OCS the easy way. One day in Vietnam, his rifle platoon was to patrol on
amtracs. He was given a compass and a topographical map with the route.
It was Greek to him, so he gave the map and compass to his platoon
sergeant, who didn't know either. Most of the Marines in the platoon
could probably have navigated, but the Marine Corps had put their lives
in the hands of these clowns.

OCS was for college graduates, and college graduates know a lot about
dumbing down expectations through passive aggression. Thus Puller had
never bothered to learn to read a map.


That's just disturbing.

--
Maggie

On 8/18/2015 7:20 AM, Stormin Mormon wrote:
On 8/17/2015 8:54 PM, Muggles wrote:
On 8/17/2015 6:52 PM, Don Y wrote:
I.e., why is *a* particular reference frame chosen and not "the other"?
"Driver's side" and "passenger's side" seem far more descriptive than
"left" and "right" for a vehicle. Why the (arbitrary?) assignment of
left and right?

Etc.


ahh I understand. Do you think you're dyslexic?


He should look up his local chapter of DAM, Mothers
Against Dyslexia.


Someone told me about a chapter called DAMIT, Mothers against Dyslexia
in Texas. I haven't heard of any other chapters elsewhere.

--
Maggie

On 8/18/2015 8:08 AM, bob_villa wrote:
On Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 12:45:13 AM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:

One of my favorite things to do is to brain storm about the 'why not'
or 'why can't it be done' or 'figure it out' kind of stuff.


"Brain storming" requires more than one...now I'm *really* starting to worry about you! (ʘ言ʘ•¬)


Well, it usually involves discussions with other people, although, like
many people I've been known to talk to myself on occasion, too. ;-)

--
Maggie

On 8/18/2015 10:04 AM, bob_villa wrote:
On Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 9:59:18 AM UTC-5, FromTheRafters wrote:
bob_villa brought next idea :
On Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 12:45:13 AM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:

One of my favorite things to do is to brain storm about the 'why not'
or 'why can't it be done' or 'figure it out' kind of stuff.


"Brain storming" requires more than one...now I'm *really* starting to worry
about you! (ʘ言ʘ•¬)

I disagree. I think you are confusing brainstorming with think tank.


http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/brainstorming


brainstorming - the mulling over of ideas *by one or more* individuals
in an attempt to devise or find a solution to a problem


--
Maggie

Hi Maggie,

On 8/18/2015 8:26 AM, Muggles wrote:
On 8/18/2015 4:13 AM, Don Y wrote:
On 8/17/2015 10:34 PM, Muggles wrote:

I have an electronic sewing machine. Wonderful machine. Used it a lot.
I like to think outside the box... Look at things differently. Do things
differently because I like 'possibilities' vs. the 'same'. One of my
favorite
things to do is to brain storm about the 'why not' or 'why can't it be
done' or
'figure it out' kind of stuff.

I prefer to ask "Why was it done *that* way, instead of some other
(possibly better) way?"

Another good question.

But there may be a genuine reason that isn't immediately apparent to
you! So, it's always worth thinking about "why"...

Once that/those other reason(s) are clear, you can question if they
are still applicable in *your* circumstances. And, if not, what
freedoms that affords you in *your* solution.

The dishwasher, here, moves all the plumbing into the wall behind
the sink/dishwasher. Including the air gap. As a result, the
cabinet beneath the sink has no "extra pipes" to work around.

More space for storage, too.

Yes. In my case, I wanted to make a metal tray that would fit the
bottom of the cabinet to catch spills, leaks, etc. -- to preserve the
integrity of the (wood) cabinet. The hoses and pipes made that difficult.

Awe... The examiner is missing the point. To see what someone else
tells you to see is what mindless drones can do, but to really SEE
is a gift.

I am lucky the examiner was flexible in this case. DMV
folks tend not to be known for their flexibility! There's
a reason the test is designed the way it is -- the applicant
is *supposed* to see ONE particular "number" in preference
to the others that are also hiding there.

Maybe the examiner couldn't see the other numbers?

I think she was just expecting *a* number for an answer
and cared not what the number meant -- "5" means pass the
applicant; any other number means impose a driving restriction.

If *your* job was to do this all day long, how much would
*you* invest in understanding "why"? I have a lot of compassion
for folks who've been pidgeonholed like this; why make their
jobs any harder/more tedious?

bob_villa wrote :
On Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 9:59:18 AM UTC-5, FromTheRafters wrote:
bob_villa brought next idea :
On Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 12:45:13 AM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:

One of my favorite things to do is to brain storm about the 'why not'
or 'why can't it be done' or 'figure it out' kind of stuff.


"Brain storming" requires more than one...now I'm *really* starting to
worry about you! (ʘ言ʘ•¬)

I disagree. I think you are confusing brainstorming with think tank.

--
...
For long you live and high you fly
But only if you ride the tide
And balanced on the biggest wave
You race towards an early grave.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/brainstorming

================================================== ===============
Brainstorming can be done alone or in groups. The term "think-tank"
refers to a group that brainstorms. Studies show that group
brainstorming is much more productive than doing it alone.

From:

http://www.essortment.com/brainstorming-34263.html

================================================== ===============

Individual brainstorming

"Individual brainstorming" is the use of brainstorming in solitary. It
typically includes such techniques as free writing, free speaking, word
association, and drawing a mind map, which is a visual note taking
technique in which people diagram their thoughts. Individual
brainstorming is a useful method in creative writing and has been shown
to be superior to traditional group brainstorming.[6][1]

This was from everybody's favorite Appeal to Authority -- Wikipedia
================================================== ===============

--
....
For long you live and high you fly
But only if you ride the tide
And balanced on the biggest wave
You race towards an early grave.

On 8/18/2015 10:46 AM, Don Y wrote:
Hi Maggie,

On 8/18/2015 8:26 AM, Muggles wrote:
On 8/18/2015 4:13 AM, Don Y wrote:
On 8/17/2015 10:34 PM, Muggles wrote:

I have an electronic sewing machine. Wonderful machine. Used it a lot.
I like to think outside the box... Look at things differently. Do
things
differently because I like 'possibilities' vs. the 'same'. One of my
favorite
things to do is to brain storm about the 'why not' or 'why can't it be
done' or
'figure it out' kind of stuff.

I prefer to ask "Why was it done *that* way, instead of some other
(possibly better) way?"

Another good question.

But there may be a genuine reason that isn't immediately apparent to
you! So, it's always worth thinking about "why"...

I get in trouble with some people for asking "why". They think I'm just
being a pain, but I really do want to know "why". If the "why" can't be
explained to me satisfactorily, then I know there's another way that's
even better.

One discussion I absolutely LOVE to participate in is Quantum Physics
and the age of the Earth/Universe and time. There are so many
possibilities to be thought about and discussed with a topic like that.
I also love talking about group dynamics because the "why" behind group
dynamics can be fascinating, but often those topics come to a screeching
halt because people who don't like to ask "why" just want to accept the
current mindset on everything and end up getting frustrated with people
who ask "why". BUT, I still love those discussions because they always
involve thinking outside the box.

Once that/those other reason(s) are clear, you can question if they
are still applicable in *your* circumstances. And, if not, what
freedoms that affords you in *your* solution.

I like to keep looking for solutions that seek out the cause and effect.
If the cause can be isolated, then the effect can be understood at
which point a better solution can be identified.

I've had people tell me over and over again that X or Y couldn't be
done, and my response was always "why not"? If we can think up
something that is useful then there's more than likely a way to make it
happen within the knowledge base that we currently have access to. If
it can't be done now, then possibly in the future. Keep looking until
we've either re-designed the idea to fit the desired end result, or
found a way to do what we need/want to do without any re-design.

The dishwasher, here, moves all the plumbing into the wall behind
the sink/dishwasher. Including the air gap. As a result, the
cabinet beneath the sink has no "extra pipes" to work around.

More space for storage, too.

Yes. In my case, I wanted to make a metal tray that would fit the
bottom of the cabinet to catch spills, leaks, etc. -- to preserve the
integrity of the (wood) cabinet. The hoses and pipes made that difficult.

Most people would have just given up instead of finding a solution and
doing something outside of the box to make it happen.

The shelves that I've always wanted in my bathroom are outside of the
box, but I am happy with what I've created thus far. They've taken an
ordinary bathroom and transformed it into something 3 dimensional to
look at (does that make sense?). Before it was ordinary. Now, there are
multiple viewpoints of interest all over the walls of the room. When
the light shines through the skylight, there are interesting shadows and
rays of sunlight at different times of the day that enhance the 3d
perspective of the room.

Awe... The examiner is missing the point. To see what someone else
tells you to see is what mindless drones can do, but to really SEE
is a gift.

I am lucky the examiner was flexible in this case. DMV
folks tend not to be known for their flexibility! There's
a reason the test is designed the way it is -- the applicant
is *supposed* to see ONE particular "number" in preference
to the others that are also hiding there.

Maybe the examiner couldn't see the other numbers?

I think she was just expecting *a* number for an answer
and cared not what the number meant -- "5" means pass the
applicant; any other number means impose a driving restriction.

I bet she brought up your answer to her superiors. "Did you know there's
more than one number people can see in that picture??" Because of your
answer, they may change something about the picture, so they'll get the
response they need.

If *your* job was to do this all day long, how much would
*you* invest in understanding "why"? I have a lot of compassion
for folks who've been pidgeonholed like this; why make their
jobs any harder/more tedious?


I dunno. I think there'd be an aspect of surprise and variety if a
person has a job like that, and for them to hear a new response from the
norm - it might make a difference in their day... make them think and
notice PEOPLE as an individual vs. part of the herd.

--
Maggie

On Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 11:05:35 AM UTC-5, FromTheRafters wrote:
bob_villa wrote :

This was from everybody's favorite Appeal to Authority -- Wikipedia


....I rest my case!

bob_villa brought next idea :
On Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 11:05:35 AM UTC-5, FromTheRafters wrote:
bob_villa wrote :

This was from everybody's favorite Appeal to Authority -- Wikipedia


...I rest my case!

But, I used *two* and you only used *one* - which, BTW, agreed with
mine and Maggie's usage. Neither Maggie nor I claimed that it doesn't
include groups, only that it *does* include individuals.

My case needs a rest too.

--
....
For long you live and high you fly
But only if you ride the tide
And balanced on the biggest wave
You race towards an early grave.

Don Y posted for all of us...



On 8/17/2015 3:35 PM, Muggles wrote:
On 8/17/2015 2:53 PM, Don Y wrote:
On 8/17/2015 12:29 PM, Muggles wrote:

[attrs elided]

Even though she may technically be mentally ill, she is one of the
sanest people I know.

I am quite sure I have ADD so I can't point fingers

Everyones got their thing... Except me.

True. I can't type numbers very accurately because I have short fingers.

ROTFL! "Typing accuracy varies directly with finger length" I'll
have to keep that in mind next time someone calls me out on a "typo"!

[Previous "best such excuse" was "font error"]

I couldn't play bar chords on my guitar either. (¬?¬)

What's your "thing"? Confession is good for the soul, right?

The most interesting "personal observation" I've made (not sure
you would call it a "thing") is that I have trouble with "reference
frames" (for want of a better word).

E.g., as a kid, I recall not being able to resolve "the left side
of the car" -- is that the left side when you are seated *in* it?
Or, the left side when you are LOOKING at it?

(e.g., like STAGE left / STAGE right -- though I've never had problems
with that because it's not "left/right" but STAGE left/right... the
reference is implied in the name -- having done a fair bit of theater
in my youth).

If I look at something that is reflected in a mirror, I automatically
read it correctly -- I am not conscious of the fact that I am
reading a reflection. Similarly, it is easy for me to misread a '2'
as a '5' without the context of surrounding digits. It's trivial for
me to "write backwards" without "effort".

"Hypo" == less, "hyper" == more. Fine. E.g., Hypotonic or hypertonic.
Which is which??

I.e., why is *a* particular reference frame chosen and not "the other"?
"Driver's side" and "passenger's side" seem far more descriptive than
"left" and "right" for a vehicle. Why the (arbitrary?) assignment of
left and right?

Etc.

You have some kind of disability; then again who doesn't? Go with it, you
aren't going to change now. Also, don't look at X-rays or CT scans...

--
Tekkie *Please post a follow-up*

Hi Sea,

On 8/18/2015 5:08 AM, SeaNymph wrote:

I found your discussion quite interesting. But now, it all makes sense to me.
I've often noted that people who work in certain disciplines tend to see things
differently, often symbolically. It seems true of engineers and people who
work in certain areas of computer sciences.

A necessary prerequisite is having a (common) lexicon to talk (and THINK!)
about a particular concept/field/etc. If you can't wrap words around
concepts -- even if its just in your own head -- it's virtually impossible
to *build* on those thoughts.

I once asked a colleague (blind from birth) what it was like to NOT see;
"I mean, do you see all black, all white, etc.?" (I was a teenager at the
time so hadn't thought this out, much). His reply could have been
terribly harsh -- my question was obviously very personal.

Instead, he calmly responded: if you can tell me what it's like to
*see*, I'll tell you what it is like NOT to see!

I considered this one of the most profound exchanges I've ever participated
in! Sure, it politely chastised me for the insensitivity of my question.
But, it also turned it around on me: what *is* sight like? How *would*
you describe it to someone who has no way of mapping words/concepts to
those physical sensations?

Vaguely reminiscent of the "tastes like milk" commercials!

On 8/18/2015 10:05 AM, Muggles wrote:
On 8/18/2015 10:46 AM, Don Y wrote:

I prefer to ask "Why was it done *that* way, instead of some other
(possibly better) way?"

Another good question.

But there may be a genuine reason that isn't immediately apparent to
you! So, it's always worth thinking about "why"...

I get in trouble with some people for asking "why". They think I'm just
being a pain, but I really do want to know "why". If the "why" can't be
explained to me satisfactorily, then I know there's another way that's
even better.

I dislike folks asking "why" as in "why do you want to DO that?"
("Because! Why the hell do you care about my MOTIVATION??"). There's
a difference between that and asking why something *is* the way it *is*.

One discussion I absolutely LOVE to participate in is Quantum Physics
and the age of the Earth/Universe and time. There are so many
possibilities to be thought about and discussed with a topic like that.
I also love talking about group dynamics because the "why" behind group
dynamics can be fascinating, but often those topics come to a screeching
halt because people who don't like to ask "why" just want to accept the
current mindset on everything and end up getting frustrated with people
who ask "why". BUT, I still love those discussions because they always
involve thinking outside the box.

There are several interesting texts out there, recently, that delve into
a lot of interesting questions governing behavior. E.g., how we set
"prices" for things (in our mind), how we are manipulated by language,
etc.

The most interesting ideas that I've been exposed to, recently, deal with
subtle issues of morality. Little "what if" puzzles that invariably
leave you trying to suss out why your response to A was different than
your response to B -- when A and B are *essentially* the same!

Paraphrasing an example (which I'll probably bodge):

You're on a bridge overlooking a street. A rotund man is standing next
to you. A streetcar (yeah, sure! : ) is coming down the street. The
driver of the streetcar has a heartattack and, as a result, the streetcar
is out of control. Directly ahead of the streetcar are a group of
children in a schoolbus. (I know, lots of preconditions, eh?)

Meanwhile, the guy next to you is peering over the edge of the bridge to
get a better look at the impending accident. In the process, he loses his
balance and falls -- directly into the path of the streetcar which diverts
it from striking the bus full of kids. (Of course, the *guy* is toast!)

Now, you can see the guy is about to fall. Do you reach out and
*save* him? And, in doing so, allow the kids to get struck by
the streetcar? Or, do you let him fall, saving their lives?

*Now*, same scenario. But, this time, the guy *doesn't* lose his
balance. Instead, would you *push* him off the bridge to save the
children?? End result is exactly the same: same body counts, etc.

Yet, to most folks, this second scenario is much harder to accept
than *letting* the guy fall to his death!

Once that/those other reason(s) are clear, you can question if they
are still applicable in *your* circumstances. And, if not, what
freedoms that affords you in *your* solution.

I like to keep looking for solutions that seek out the cause and effect.
If the cause can be isolated, then the effect can be understood at
which point a better solution can be identified.

I've had people tell me over and over again that X or Y couldn't be
done, and my response was always "why not"? If we can think up
something that is useful then there's more than likely a way to make it
happen within the knowledge base that we currently have access to. If
it can't be done now, then possibly in the future. Keep looking until
we've either re-designed the idea to fit the desired end result, or
found a way to do what we need/want to do without any re-design.

Often (at least in my line of work), the information is there in front
of you. *But*, you have self-imposed, preconceived notions/assumptions
that are UNnecessarily limiting your options. "The Box"

The dishwasher, here, moves all the plumbing into the wall behind
the sink/dishwasher. Including the air gap. As a result, the
cabinet beneath the sink has no "extra pipes" to work around.

More space for storage, too.

Yes. In my case, I wanted to make a metal tray that would fit the
bottom of the cabinet to catch spills, leaks, etc. -- to preserve the
integrity of the (wood) cabinet. The hoses and pipes made that difficult.

Most people would have just given up instead of finding a solution and
doing something outside of the box to make it happen.

Most people would have fallen for the "that's the way its always been done"
answer!

The shelves that I've always wanted in my bathroom are outside of the
box, but I am happy with what I've created thus far. They've taken an
ordinary bathroom and transformed it into something 3 dimensional to
look at (does that make sense?). Before it was ordinary. Now, there are
multiple viewpoints of interest all over the walls of the room. When
the light shines through the skylight, there are interesting shadows and
rays of sunlight at different times of the day that enhance the 3d
perspective of the room.

Put a rotating mirror ball on the ceiling and some colored pin-spots!
Make yours the bathroom of envy!! :

And, for the coup de grace, put a COINSLOT next to the toilet!!
(I've toyed with putting one outside the front door in lieu of a
DOORBELL! But, I am afraid it would tempt vandals!)

Awe... The examiner is missing the point. To see what someone else
tells you to see is what mindless drones can do, but to really SEE
is a gift.

I am lucky the examiner was flexible in this case. DMV
folks tend not to be known for their flexibility! There's
a reason the test is designed the way it is -- the applicant
is *supposed* to see ONE particular "number" in preference
to the others that are also hiding there.

Maybe the examiner couldn't see the other numbers?

I think she was just expecting *a* number for an answer
and cared not what the number meant -- "5" means pass the
applicant; any other number means impose a driving restriction.

I bet she brought up your answer to her superiors. "Did you know there's
more than one number people can see in that picture??" Because of your
answer, they may change something about the picture, so they'll get the
response they need.

You give them more credit than I would! : I expect she forgot
about me as soon as I stepped out of line (and her attention
moved on to that next applicant) ou give them more credit than I would!

If *your* job was to do this all day long, how much would
*you* invest in understanding "why"? I have a lot of compassion
for folks who've been pidgeonholed like this; why make their
jobs any harder/more tedious?

I dunno. I think there'd be an aspect of surprise and variety if a
person has a job like that, and for them to hear a new response from the
norm - it might make a difference in their day... make them think and
notice PEOPLE as an individual vs. part of the herd.

Most people consider their "job" to be "work" -- not something they
want to think about or invest much effort in. Just get to 5PM
and deal with tomorrow, tomorrow. I've found this to be the case at all
levels of employment -- engineers are just as numb to their jobs as
ditch diggers and doctors. What incentive do most folks have to "care"?

On 8/18/2015 3:34 PM, Don Y wrote:
On 8/18/2015 10:05 AM, Muggles wrote:
[...]
I get in trouble with some people for asking "why". They think I'm just
being a pain, but I really do want to know "why". If the "why" can't be
explained to me satisfactorily, then I know there's another way that's
even better.

I dislike folks asking "why" as in "why do you want to DO that?"
("Because! Why the hell do you care about my MOTIVATION??"). There's
a difference between that and asking why something *is* the way it *is*.

Exactly! Although, sometimes asking "why do you want to DO that" is the
right question to ask.

One discussion I absolutely LOVE to participate in is Quantum Physics
and the age of the Earth/Universe and time. There are so many
possibilities to be thought about and discussed with a topic like that.
I also love talking about group dynamics because the "why" behind group
dynamics can be fascinating, but often those topics come to a screeching
halt because people who don't like to ask "why" just want to accept the
current mindset on everything and end up getting frustrated with people
who ask "why". BUT, I still love those discussions because they always
involve thinking outside the box.

There are several interesting texts out there, recently, that delve into
a lot of interesting questions governing behavior. E.g., how we set
"prices" for things (in our mind), how we are manipulated by language,
etc.

The most interesting ideas that I've been exposed to, recently, deal with
subtle issues of morality. Little "what if" puzzles that invariably
leave you trying to suss out why your response to A was different than
your response to B -- when A and B are *essentially* the same!

Love it!

Paraphrasing an example (which I'll probably bodge):

You're on a bridge overlooking a street. A rotund man is standing next
to you. A streetcar (yeah, sure! : ) is coming down the street. The
driver of the streetcar has a heartattack and, as a result, the streetcar
is out of control. Directly ahead of the streetcar are a group of
children in a schoolbus. (I know, lots of preconditions, eh?)

Meanwhile, the guy next to you is peering over the edge of the bridge to
get a better look at the impending accident. In the process, he loses his
balance and falls -- directly into the path of the streetcar which diverts
it from striking the bus full of kids. (Of course, the *guy* is toast!)

Now, you can see the guy is about to fall. Do you reach out and
*save* him? And, in doing so, allow the kids to get struck by
the streetcar? Or, do you let him fall, saving their lives?

*Now*, same scenario. But, this time, the guy *doesn't* lose his
balance. Instead, would you *push* him off the bridge to save the
children?? End result is exactly the same: same body counts, etc.

Yet, to most folks, this second scenario is much harder to accept
than *letting* the guy fall to his death!

Interesting for sure.

Once that/those other reason(s) are clear, you can question if they
are still applicable in *your* circumstances. And, if not, what
freedoms that affords you in *your* solution.

I like to keep looking for solutions that seek out the cause and effect.
If the cause can be isolated, then the effect can be understood at
which point a better solution can be identified.

I've had people tell me over and over again that X or Y couldn't be
done, and my response was always "why not"? If we can think up
something that is useful then there's more than likely a way to make it
happen within the knowledge base that we currently have access to. If
it can't be done now, then possibly in the future. Keep looking until
we've either re-designed the idea to fit the desired end result, or
found a way to do what we need/want to do without any re-design.

Often (at least in my line of work), the information is there in front
of you. *But*, you have self-imposed, preconceived notions/assumptions
that are UNnecessarily limiting your options. "The Box"

yeah ... I hate that box.

The dishwasher, here, moves all the plumbing into the wall behind
the sink/dishwasher. Including the air gap. As a result, the
cabinet beneath the sink has no "extra pipes" to work around.

More space for storage, too.

Yes. In my case, I wanted to make a metal tray that would fit the
bottom of the cabinet to catch spills, leaks, etc. -- to preserve the
integrity of the (wood) cabinet. The hoses and pipes made that
difficult.

Most people would have just given up instead of finding a solution and
doing something outside of the box to make it happen.

Most people would have fallen for the "that's the way its always been done"
answer!

It reminds me of how many people are willing to stand in a long line
instead of seeing that a new checker if about to open the register and
heading for that one.

The shelves that I've always wanted in my bathroom are outside of the
box, but I am happy with what I've created thus far. They've taken an
ordinary bathroom and transformed it into something 3 dimensional to
look at (does that make sense?). Before it was ordinary. Now, there are
multiple viewpoints of interest all over the walls of the room. When
the light shines through the skylight, there are interesting shadows and
rays of sunlight at different times of the day that enhance the 3d
perspective of the room.

Put a rotating mirror ball on the ceiling and some colored pin-spots!
Make yours the bathroom of envy!! :

LOL I don't have that much room.

And, for the coup de grace, put a COINSLOT next to the toilet!!
(I've toyed with putting one outside the front door in lieu of a
DOORBELL! But, I am afraid it would tempt vandals!)

Now THAT's funny!

[...]

I bet she brought up your answer to her superiors. "Did you know there's
more than one number people can see in that picture??" Because of your
answer, they may change something about the picture, so they'll get the
response they need.

You give them more credit than I would! : I expect she forgot
about me as soon as I stepped out of line (and her attention
moved on to that next applicant) ou give them more credit than I would!

Maybe, but it could happen.
[...]

I dunno. I think there'd be an aspect of surprise and variety if a
person has a job like that, and for them to hear a new response from the
norm - it might make a difference in their day... make them think and
notice PEOPLE as an individual vs. part of the herd.

Most people consider their "job" to be "work" -- not something they
want to think about or invest much effort in. Just get to 5PM
and deal with tomorrow, tomorrow. I've found this to be the case at all
levels of employment -- engineers are just as numb to their jobs as
ditch diggers and doctors. What incentive do most folks have to "care"?


Good question. For me, it means something and adds meaning to every day.

--
Maggie

On Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 12:05:47 PM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 8/18/2015 10:46 AM, Don Y wrote:
Hi Maggie,

On 8/18/2015 8:26 AM, Muggles wrote:
On 8/18/2015 4:13 AM, Don Y wrote:
On 8/17/2015 10:34 PM, Muggles wrote:

I have an electronic sewing machine. Wonderful machine. Used it a lot.
I like to think outside the box... Look at things differently. Do
things
differently because I like 'possibilities' vs. the 'same'. One of my
favorite
things to do is to brain storm about the 'why not' or 'why can't it be
done' or
'figure it out' kind of stuff.

I prefer to ask "Why was it done *that* way, instead of some other
(possibly better) way?"

Another good question.

But there may be a genuine reason that isn't immediately apparent to
you! So, it's always worth thinking about "why"...

I get in trouble with some people for asking "why". They think I'm just
being a pain, but I really do want to know "why". If the "why" can't be
explained to me satisfactorily, then I know there's another way that's
even better.

One discussion I absolutely LOVE to participate in is Quantum Physics
and the age of the Earth/Universe and time. There are so many
possibilities to be thought about and discussed with a topic like that.
I also love talking about group dynamics because the "why" behind group
dynamics can be fascinating, but often those topics come to a screeching
halt because people who don't like to ask "why" just want to accept the
current mindset on everything and end up getting frustrated with people
who ask "why". BUT, I still love those discussions because they always
involve thinking outside the box.

--
Maggie

I once got a cat to help me understand string theory. He was a cool cat named Schrödinger. à²*€¿à²*

[8~{} Uncle Meow Monster

On 8/18/2015 4:09 PM, Uncle Monster wrote:
On Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 12:05:47 PM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 8/18/2015 10:46 AM, Don Y wrote:
Hi Maggie,

On 8/18/2015 8:26 AM, Muggles wrote:
On 8/18/2015 4:13 AM, Don Y wrote:
On 8/17/2015 10:34 PM, Muggles wrote:

I have an electronic sewing machine. Wonderful machine. Used it a lot.
I like to think outside the box... Look at things differently. Do
things
differently because I like 'possibilities' vs. the 'same'. One of my
favorite
things to do is to brain storm about the 'why not' or 'why can't it be
done' or
'figure it out' kind of stuff.

I prefer to ask "Why was it done *that* way, instead of some other
(possibly better) way?"

Another good question.

But there may be a genuine reason that isn't immediately apparent to
you! So, it's always worth thinking about "why"...

I get in trouble with some people for asking "why". They think I'm just
being a pain, but I really do want to know "why". If the "why" can't be
explained to me satisfactorily, then I know there's another way that's
even better.

One discussion I absolutely LOVE to participate in is Quantum Physics
and the age of the Earth/Universe and time. There are so many
possibilities to be thought about and discussed with a topic like that.
I also love talking about group dynamics because the "why" behind group
dynamics can be fascinating, but often those topics come to a screeching
halt because people who don't like to ask "why" just want to accept the
current mindset on everything and end up getting frustrated with people
who ask "why". BUT, I still love those discussions because they always
involve thinking outside the box.

--
Maggie

I once got a cat to help me understand string theory. He was a cool cat named Schrödinger. à²*€¿à²*

[8~{} Uncle Meow Monster


Growing up we always let our cat show us how cats tip toe when they have
tape on their paw pads.

--
Maggie

On 8/18/2015 1:47 PM, Muggles wrote:

Put a rotating mirror ball on the ceiling and some colored pin-spots!
Make yours the bathroom of envy!! :

LOL I don't have that much room.

*Make* room! Move the WC into the linen closet; the sink out into
the hallway; etc.

Gotta have priororities!

And, for the coup de grace, put a COINSLOT next to the toilet!!
(I've toyed with putting one outside the front door in lieu of a
DOORBELL! But, I am afraid it would tempt vandals!)

Now THAT's funny!

I thought it would be amusing to watch to see how people reacted to it.
Put "cues" (e.g., a coinslot) in the "wrong" place and it confuses
people: "Hmmm... coinslot tells me I should insert some coins.
But, why is it *here*??"

For years, I removed the outgoing message from my phone answering machine.
So, callers were just met with a "beep". Amusing to see how many would
*stumble* when confronted with it!

C'mon, it's an answering machine, obviously. You KNOW what to do when you
hear the "beep". Why does the fact that the mindless message that you
WOULDN'T actually listen to is missing??

I have a rotary dial telephone that I've hacked to generate touch tones.

[Note, you will often see a pushbutton phone that can generate "dial pulses"
in lieu of touch tones -- for use on old lines that don't support touch
tones. What I've done is the exact opposite!]

When people go to use it, they first smile and chuckle a bit: "Gee, I
haven't seen a phone like this (dial) in a LONG time!" Then, when they
dial their number and hear tick-a-tick-a-tick-a-tick-a.... BEEP,
they do a double-take: the tick-a-tick-a is something their memories
have come to expect from a rotary phone (the outgoing dial pulses).
But, the "beep" is unexpected -- they haven't pushed any buttons!

On 8/18/2015 3:34 PM, Don Y wrote:
On 8/18/2015 10:05 AM, Muggles wrote:
On 8/18/2015 10:46 AM, Don Y wrote:

I prefer to ask "Why was it done *that* way, instead of some other
(possibly better) way?"

snipped for brevity


Often (at least in my line of work), the information is there in front
of you. *But*, you have self-imposed, preconceived notions/assumptions
that are UNnecessarily limiting your options. "The Box"

The dishwasher, here, moves all the plumbing into the wall behind
the sink/dishwasher. Including the air gap. As a result, the
cabinet beneath the sink has no "extra pipes" to work around.

More space for storage, too.

Yes. In my case, I wanted to make a metal tray that would fit the
bottom of the cabinet to catch spills, leaks, etc. -- to preserve the
integrity of the (wood) cabinet. The hoses and pipes made that
difficult.

Most people would have just given up instead of finding a solution and
doing something outside of the box to make it happen.

Most people would have fallen for the "that's the way its always been done"
answer!

I despise that sort of "answer". It's not an answer, it's an excuse,
imo. It was something I dealt with a lot where I used to work. In many
types of work environments, that simply doesn't work. Just because
something has always been done that way does not necessarily lead to the
conclusion that it's the correct way or even the best way. But people
with that mindset are hard to move.

On 8/18/2015 4:47 PM, Don Y wrote:
On 8/18/2015 1:47 PM, Muggles wrote:

Put a rotating mirror ball on the ceiling and some colored pin-spots!
Make yours the bathroom of envy!! :

LOL I don't have that much room.

*Make* room! Move the WC into the linen closet; the sink out into
the hallway; etc.

Gotta have priororities!

All I'd need is some muscle and help and lots of money.

And, for the coup de grace, put a COINSLOT next to the toilet!!
(I've toyed with putting one outside the front door in lieu of a
DOORBELL! But, I am afraid it would tempt vandals!)

Now THAT's funny!

I thought it would be amusing to watch to see how people reacted to it.
Put "cues" (e.g., a coinslot) in the "wrong" place and it confuses
people: "Hmmm... coinslot tells me I should insert some coins.
But, why is it *here*??"

For years, I removed the outgoing message from my phone answering machine.
So, callers were just met with a "beep". Amusing to see how many would
*stumble* when confronted with it!

C'mon, it's an answering machine, obviously. You KNOW what to do when you
hear the "beep". Why does the fact that the mindless message that you
WOULDN'T actually listen to is missing??

I have a rotary dial telephone that I've hacked to generate touch tones.

[Note, you will often see a pushbutton phone that can generate "dial
pulses"
in lieu of touch tones -- for use on old lines that don't support touch
tones. What I've done is the exact opposite!]

When people go to use it, they first smile and chuckle a bit: "Gee, I
haven't seen a phone like this (dial) in a LONG time!" Then, when they
dial their number and hear tick-a-tick-a-tick-a-tick-a.... BEEP,
they do a double-take: the tick-a-tick-a is something their memories
have come to expect from a rotary phone (the outgoing dial pulses).
But, the "beep" is unexpected -- they haven't pushed any buttons!

I used to send junk mail back to the junk mailers with someone elses
junk mail in the envelopes.

--
Maggie

On 8/18/2015 2:48 PM, SeaNymph wrote:

Most people would have just given up instead of finding a solution and
doing something outside of the box to make it happen.

Most people would have fallen for the "that's the way its always been done"
answer!

I despise that sort of "answer". It's not an answer, it's an excuse, imo. It
was something I dealt with a lot where I used to work. In many types of work
environments, that simply doesn't work. Just because something has always been
done that way does not necessarily lead to the conclusion that it's the correct
way or even the best way. But people with that mindset are hard to move.

It's a *safe* attitude!

Look at how many interactions and decisions you encounter in daily
life that fall in that category. Almost *all* of medicine is
based on that approach: if you *do* something, then you risk
incurring liability. OTOH, if you maintain the status quo, you
are just perpetuating someone *else's* decision!

I've always been dumbfounded by the concept of radical mastectomy.
You mean it never occurred to anyone to try lumpectomy? Yet, once
mastectomy was the "acknowledged treatment", it was really hard to
move folks away from that to more "rational" treatments -- no one
wanted to go first!

Even removing the liability issue, "change" requires effort.
Most people (IME) are lazy thinkers. They'd rather someone else
spoonfeed them pablum then have to think about what it might mean.

On 8/18/2015 3:00 PM, Muggles wrote:

Put a rotating mirror ball on the ceiling and some colored pin-spots!
Make yours the bathroom of envy!! :

LOL I don't have that much room.

*Make* room! Move the WC into the linen closet; the sink out into
the hallway; etc.

Gotta have priororities!

All I'd need is some muscle and help and lots of money.

Find a wealthier husband?? :

On 8/18/2015 5:43 PM, Don Y wrote:
On 8/18/2015 3:00 PM, Muggles wrote:

Put a rotating mirror ball on the ceiling and some colored pin-spots!
Make yours the bathroom of envy!! :

LOL I don't have that much room.

*Make* room! Move the WC into the linen closet; the sink out into
the hallway; etc.

Gotta have priororities!

All I'd need is some muscle and help and lots of money.

Find a wealthier husband?? :


After 35 years with the same man, I don't want to go to the trouble of
training another one.

--
Maggie

On Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 4:13:24 PM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 8/18/2015 4:09 PM, Uncle Monster wrote:
On Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 12:05:47 PM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 8/18/2015 10:46 AM, Don Y wrote:
Hi Maggie,

On 8/18/2015 8:26 AM, Muggles wrote:
On 8/18/2015 4:13 AM, Don Y wrote:
On 8/17/2015 10:34 PM, Muggles wrote:

I have an electronic sewing machine. Wonderful machine. Used it a lot.
I like to think outside the box... Look at things differently. Do
things
differently because I like 'possibilities' vs. the 'same'. One of my
favorite
things to do is to brain storm about the 'why not' or 'why can't it be
done' or
'figure it out' kind of stuff.

I prefer to ask "Why was it done *that* way, instead of some other
(possibly better) way?"

Another good question.

But there may be a genuine reason that isn't immediately apparent to
you! So, it's always worth thinking about "why"...

I get in trouble with some people for asking "why". They think I'm just
being a pain, but I really do want to know "why". If the "why" can't be
explained to me satisfactorily, then I know there's another way that's
even better.

One discussion I absolutely LOVE to participate in is Quantum Physics
and the age of the Earth/Universe and time. There are so many
possibilities to be thought about and discussed with a topic like that..
I also love talking about group dynamics because the "why" behind group
dynamics can be fascinating, but often those topics come to a screeching
halt because people who don't like to ask "why" just want to accept the
current mindset on everything and end up getting frustrated with people
who ask "why". BUT, I still love those discussions because they always
involve thinking outside the box.

--
Maggie

I once got a cat to help me understand string theory. He was a cool cat named Schrödinger. à²*€¿à²*

[8~{} Uncle Meow Monster


Growing up we always let our cat show us how cats tip toe when they have
tape on their paw pads.

--
Maggie

Did you miss the theoretical physics references? I couldn't help it. à²*€¿à²*

[8~{} Uncle Physics Monster

On 8/18/2015 6:08 PM, Uncle Monster wrote:
On Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 4:13:24 PM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 8/18/2015 4:09 PM, Uncle Monster wrote:
On Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 12:05:47 PM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 8/18/2015 10:46 AM, Don Y wrote:
Hi Maggie,

On 8/18/2015 8:26 AM, Muggles wrote:
On 8/18/2015 4:13 AM, Don Y wrote:
On 8/17/2015 10:34 PM, Muggles wrote:

I have an electronic sewing machine. Wonderful machine. Used it a lot.
I like to think outside the box... Look at things differently. Do
things
differently because I like 'possibilities' vs. the 'same'. One of my
favorite
things to do is to brain storm about the 'why not' or 'why can't it be
done' or
'figure it out' kind of stuff.

I prefer to ask "Why was it done *that* way, instead of some other
(possibly better) way?"

Another good question.

But there may be a genuine reason that isn't immediately apparent to
you! So, it's always worth thinking about "why"...

I get in trouble with some people for asking "why". They think I'm just
being a pain, but I really do want to know "why". If the "why" can't be
explained to me satisfactorily, then I know there's another way that's
even better.

One discussion I absolutely LOVE to participate in is Quantum Physics
and the age of the Earth/Universe and time. There are so many
possibilities to be thought about and discussed with a topic like that.
I also love talking about group dynamics because the "why" behind group
dynamics can be fascinating, but often those topics come to a screeching
halt because people who don't like to ask "why" just want to accept the
current mindset on everything and end up getting frustrated with people
who ask "why". BUT, I still love those discussions because they always
involve thinking outside the box.

--
Maggie

I once got a cat to help me understand string theory. He was a cool cat named Schrödinger. à²*€¿à²*

[8~{} Uncle Meow Monster


Growing up we always let our cat show us how cats tip toe when they have
tape on their paw pads.

--
Maggie

Did you miss the theoretical physics references? I couldn't help it. à²*€¿à²*

[8~{} Uncle Physics Monster


naaaaaa I just didn't have a better come back! You're the king.

--
Maggie

On Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 4:47:35 PM UTC-5, Don Y wrote:
On 8/18/2015 1:47 PM, Muggles wrote:

Put a rotating mirror ball on the ceiling and some colored pin-spots!
Make yours the bathroom of envy!! :

LOL I don't have that much room.

*Make* room! Move the WC into the linen closet; the sink out into
the hallway; etc.

Gotta have priororities!

And, for the coup de grace, put a COINSLOT next to the toilet!!
(I've toyed with putting one outside the front door in lieu of a
DOORBELL! But, I am afraid it would tempt vandals!)

Now THAT's funny!

I thought it would be amusing to watch to see how people reacted to it.
Put "cues" (e.g., a coinslot) in the "wrong" place and it confuses
people: "Hmmm... coinslot tells me I should insert some coins.
But, why is it *here*??"

For years, I removed the outgoing message from my phone answering machine..
So, callers were just met with a "beep". Amusing to see how many would
*stumble* when confronted with it!

C'mon, it's an answering machine, obviously. You KNOW what to do when you
hear the "beep". Why does the fact that the mindless message that you
WOULDN'T actually listen to is missing??

I have a rotary dial telephone that I've hacked to generate touch tones.

[Note, you will often see a pushbutton phone that can generate "dial pulses"
in lieu of touch tones -- for use on old lines that don't support touch
tones. What I've done is the exact opposite!]

When people go to use it, they first smile and chuckle a bit: "Gee, I
haven't seen a phone like this (dial) in a LONG time!" Then, when they
dial their number and hear tick-a-tick-a-tick-a-tick-a.... BEEP,
they do a double-take: the tick-a-tick-a is something their memories
have come to expect from a rotary phone (the outgoing dial pulses).
But, the "beep" is unexpected -- they haven't pushed any buttons!

One of the items I once installed on mechanical dialers for alarm systems was a dial converter module that converted the dial pulses to touch tones. I haven't seen one in years or even come across one abandoned on a backboard in a telephone equipment closet. For a while, in some places, a DTMF to pulse dial converter was needed until the central office using the mechanical Strowger switches was modernized. A few years ago, I came across a cabinet in a retail store electrical equipment room filled with Strowgers that had been the internal phone system for the store back in the rotary dial days. If I'd had the room to put it somewhere, it would have been fun to play with. (¬€¿Â¬)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wcFpaI1Y_SE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TwhfN9XJHdE

[8~{} Uncle Switch Monster

On 8/18/2015 9:16 PM, Uncle Monster wrote:
On Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 4:47:35 PM UTC-5, Don Y wrote:
When people go to use it, they first smile and chuckle a bit: "Gee, I
haven't seen a phone like this (dial) in a LONG time!" Then, when they
dial their number and hear tick-a-tick-a-tick-a-tick-a.... BEEP,
they do a double-take: the tick-a-tick-a is something their memories
have come to expect from a rotary phone (the outgoing dial pulses).
But, the "beep" is unexpected -- they haven't pushed any buttons!

One of the items I once installed on mechanical dialers for alarm systems was a dial converter module that converted the dial pulses to touch tones. I haven't seen one in years or even come across one abandoned on a backboard in a telephone equipment closet. For a while, in some places, a DTMF to pulse dial converter was needed until the central office using the mechanical Strowger switches was modernized. A few years ago, I came across a cabinet in a retail store electrical equipment room filled with Strowgers that had been the internal phone system for the store back in the rotary dial days. If I'd had the room to put it somewhere, it would have been fun to play with. (¬€¿Â¬)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wcFpaI1Y_SE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TwhfN9XJHdE

[8~{} Uncle Switch Monster


Back in the eighties, I had to pay extra for touch
tone dialing, or use only rotary phones. Seemed
that rotary was the industry standard. One town near
me had rotary or tone, for everyone, so smart money
stopped paying needlessly for it.

Do some lines now days accept tone only? I'd figure
rotary is pretty much universal.

--
..
Christopher A. Young
learn more about Jesus
.. www.lds.org
..
..

On 8/18/2015 3:48 PM, Muggles wrote:

All I'd need is some muscle and help and lots of money.

Find a wealthier husband?? :

After 35 years with the same man, I don't want to go to the trouble of
training another one.

Gee, I thought that was the part women enjoyed *most*!!?

On 8/18/2015 9:12 PM, Don Y wrote:
On 8/18/2015 3:48 PM, Muggles wrote:

All I'd need is some muscle and help and lots of money.

Find a wealthier husband?? :

After 35 years with the same man, I don't want to go to the trouble of
training another one.

Gee, I thought that was the part women enjoyed *most*!!?



I guess it depends what day you bring up the subject! lol

--
Maggie

On 8/18/2015 9:48 PM, Muggles wrote:

After 35 years with the same man, I don't want to go to the trouble of
training another one.

Gee, I thought that was the part women enjoyed *most*!!?

I guess it depends what day you bring up the subject! lol

.... and, whether or not he left the seat up the night before!

On 8/19/2015 12:30 AM, Don Y wrote:
On 8/18/2015 9:48 PM, Muggles wrote:

After 35 years with the same man, I don't want to go to the trouble of
training another one.

Gee, I thought that was the part women enjoyed *most*!!?

I guess it depends what day you bring up the subject! lol

... and, whether or not he left the seat up the night before!



OH yeah! I forgot about that one. LOL

--
Maggie

On Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 8:32:50 PM UTC-5, Stormin Mormon wrote:
On 8/18/2015 9:16 PM, Uncle Monster wrote:
On Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 4:47:35 PM UTC-5, Don Y wrote:
When people go to use it, they first smile and chuckle a bit: "Gee, I
haven't seen a phone like this (dial) in a LONG time!" Then, when they
dial their number and hear tick-a-tick-a-tick-a-tick-a.... BEEP,
they do a double-take: the tick-a-tick-a is something their memories
have come to expect from a rotary phone (the outgoing dial pulses).
But, the "beep" is unexpected -- they haven't pushed any buttons!

One of the items I once installed on mechanical dialers for alarm systems was a dial converter module that converted the dial pulses to touch tones. I haven't seen one in years or even come across one abandoned on a backboard in a telephone equipment closet. For a while, in some places, a DTMF to pulse dial converter was needed until the central office using the mechanical Strowger switches was modernized. A few years ago, I came across a cabinet in a retail store electrical equipment room filled with Strowgers that had been the internal phone system for the store back in the rotary dial days. If I'd had the room to put it somewhere, it would have been fun to play with. (¬€¿Â¬)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wcFpaI1Y_SE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TwhfN9XJHdE

[8~{} Uncle Switch Monster


Back in the eighties, I had to pay extra for touch
tone dialing, or use only rotary phones. Seemed
that rotary was the industry standard. One town near
me had rotary or tone, for everyone, so smart money
stopped paying needlessly for it.

Do some lines now days accept tone only? I'd figure
rotary is pretty much universal.
--
.

All the central offices I've come across work with both pulse and DTMF dialing to make calls. DTMF is so much faster than pulse dialing and I don't know why anyone would purposely use it unless they have an old phone as a novelty or as something for interior decoration. Many inexpensive telephones have a switch on them that allows you to select between pulse and tone dialing. Possibly because there are still mechanically switched central offices in some places. Crap! Now I remember what the pulse to DTMF converters were for. They were for non Bell System long distance providers and the old mechanical dialers for alarms needed to be able to dial through the private long distance company to reach central stations that would otherwise be an expensive long distance call through Bell. The converters also allowed legacy rotary dial phones to use the private long distance carrier. (¬€¿Â¬)

[8~{} Uncle Phone Moster

On 8/18/2015 5:43 PM, Don Y wrote:
On 8/18/2015 2:48 PM, SeaNymph wrote:

Most people would have just given up instead of finding a solution and
doing something outside of the box to make it happen.

Most people would have fallen for the "that's the way its always been
done"
answer!

I despise that sort of "answer". It's not an answer, it's an excuse,
imo. It
was something I dealt with a lot where I used to work. In many types
of work
environments, that simply doesn't work. Just because something has
always been
done that way does not necessarily lead to the conclusion that it's
the correct
way or even the best way. But people with that mindset are hard to move.

It's a *safe* attitude!

Look at how many interactions and decisions you encounter in daily
life that fall in that category. Almost *all* of medicine is
based on that approach: if you *do* something, then you risk
incurring liability. OTOH, if you maintain the status quo, you
are just perpetuating someone *else's* decision!

I've always been dumbfounded by the concept of radical mastectomy.
You mean it never occurred to anyone to try lumpectomy? Yet, once
mastectomy was the "acknowledged treatment", it was really hard to
move folks away from that to more "rational" treatments -- no one
wanted to go first!

Well I believe that lumpectomies are almost always the first step. BTDT

On 8/19/2015 5:35 AM, SeaNymph wrote:

I've always been dumbfounded by the concept of radical mastectomy.
You mean it never occurred to anyone to try lumpectomy? Yet, once
mastectomy was the "acknowledged treatment", it was really hard to
move folks away from that to more "rational" treatments -- no one
wanted to go first!

Well I believe that lumpectomies are almost always the first step. BTDT

*Now* they are. It was a significant change in treatment to adopt
that in lieu of mastectomy.

Uncle Monster posted for all of us...



On Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 12:05:47 PM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 8/18/2015 10:46 AM, Don Y wrote:
Hi Maggie,

On 8/18/2015 8:26 AM, Muggles wrote:
On 8/18/2015 4:13 AM, Don Y wrote:
On 8/17/2015 10:34 PM, Muggles wrote:

I have an electronic sewing machine. Wonderful machine. Used it a lot.
I like to think outside the box... Look at things differently. Do
things
differently because I like 'possibilities' vs. the 'same'. One of my
favorite
things to do is to brain storm about the 'why not' or 'why can't it be
done' or
'figure it out' kind of stuff.

I prefer to ask "Why was it done *that* way, instead of some other
(possibly better) way?"

Another good question.

But there may be a genuine reason that isn't immediately apparent to
you! So, it's always worth thinking about "why"...

I get in trouble with some people for asking "why". They think I'm just
being a pain, but I really do want to know "why". If the "why" can't be
explained to me satisfactorily, then I know there's another way that's
even better.

One discussion I absolutely LOVE to participate in is Quantum Physics
and the age of the Earth/Universe and time. There are so many
possibilities to be thought about and discussed with a topic like that.
I also love talking about group dynamics because the "why" behind group
dynamics can be fascinating, but often those topics come to a screeching
halt because people who don't like to ask "why" just want to accept the
current mindset on everything and end up getting frustrated with people
who ask "why". BUT, I still love those discussions because they always
involve thinking outside the box.

--
Maggie

I once got a cat to help me understand string theory. He was a cool cat named Schrödinger. ???

[8~{} Uncle Meow Monster

The only string theory I know is that package services used to allow it. I
don't believe they do now. I always used the real thin stuff so it would cut
into my fingers and break at inopportune times...

--
Tekkie