Friday, 1 February 2013

By on February 1st, 2013 in Barbara, science kits

07:26 – Barbara spent last night at home. She’s spending tonight with her dad, and then her sister is covering Saturday and Sunday nights, with Barbara back on duty next Monday and Tuesday nights, if necessary. We’re hoping her mom will be back at home by next week.

I’m still working on science kits. We’re in pretty good shape right now, with roughly 40 kits in stock. I’m trying to get 60 more chemistry kits ready to assemble, followed by 60 more biology kits, followed by 60 life science kits.


08:24 – I’m off to sit in the den, watch Heartland re-runs, and label bottles. Thousands of them. Barbara usually does the bottle labeling on weekends while she watches stuff on Netflix streaming, but she’s been pretty busy with her parents lately so I’ll try to take up some of the slack.

24 Comments and discussion on "Friday, 1 February 2013"

  1. Miles_Teg says:

    “I’m still working on science kits. We’re in pretty good shape right now, with roughly 40 kits in stock. I’m trying to get 60 more chemistry kits ready to assemble, followed by 60 more biology kits, followed by 60 life science kits.”

    I’ve wondered for a while how error prone this sort of work is, and what checking you do to make sure that kit contents are exactly correct. I know I’d be bored rigid after the tenth kit.

  2. Ed says:

    There must be some way to automate the labeling. Used equipment off of Craigslist, something from the maker community…

  3. Robert Bruce Thompson says:

    Not very error-prone at all. Our procedures don’t allow much room for errors to slip through.

    As to automated bottle labeling, I’ve looked into it and it’s not practical.

  4. MrAtoz says:

    “As to automated bottle labeling, I’ve looked into it and it’s not practical.”

    Since you order in bulk, could you get the labels silkscreened?

  5. Lynn McGuire says:

    If you get a Lucille Ball work-alike, I’ll bet that she could mess up your labeling.

  6. Lynn McGuire says:

    Has Barbara thought about getting a live-in night nurse for her parents? Sounds like they are there. In fact, it sounds like they need to move from assisted living to the next stage, whatever that is.

    My parents got my grandmother a live-in night nurse for five nights a week when she became 100% wheelchair dependent. My grandmother fired her after two weeks because of the “incredible expense” (it was not and she had plenty of money). And then Grandma went back to calling my aunt for daily help and falling at night. It was incredibly frustrating for them all.

  7. OFD says:

    “If you get a Lucille Ball work-alike, I’ll bet that she could mess up your labeling.”

    It could mess up a whole lotta other things, too; Lucy was *hot*. And smart as a whip, too; probably take over the whole operation.

    And here’s the famous scene, always a hoot:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8NPzLBSBzPI

  8. Robert Bruce Thompson says:

    Ah, I thought that’d be a link to Vitameatavegamin.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4AZK2-Tfc84

  9. Robert Bruce Thompson says:

    Incidentally, why is YouTube now using https?

  10. Ray Thompson says:

    Ah, I thought that’d be a link to Vitameatavegamin.

    I also liked the grape stomping scene.

    Incidentally, why is YouTube now using https?

    A lot of sites are going to HTTPS so that people know they are connecting to the true site. It is a way to prevent clones and lookalikes. We are under pressure to convert our websites to HTTPS even though we serve no content that must be protected. We don’t store credit cards, SSNs or anything of any value on the web server.

    It could also be a money grab by the certificate issuing authorities who want a non-trivial amount of money each year to have the certificate.

  11. OFD says:

    I was not consulted on the change but I simply googled your question as-is and got some stuff there with this concluding para:

    “It’s very important to note that this is just a first step in enabling HTTPS for the entire YouTube viewing experience. In particular, only the YouTube player code is accessible via HTTPS at this time. The actual video bitstream, and some additional content loaded by the YouTube player may still be accessed via standard HTTP connections when you use an HTTPS URL in your embed code. Also note that HTTPS remains optional for YouTube embeds; we have no plans to turn off support for the HTTP URLs.”

  12. Dave B. says:

    My parents got my grandmother a live-in night nurse for five nights a week when she became 100% wheelchair dependent. My grandmother fired her after two weeks because of the “incredible expense” (it was not and she had plenty of money). And then Grandma went back to calling my aunt for daily help and falling at night. It was incredibly frustrating for them all.

    Sounds like my mother balking at the cost of the assisted living facility. The rent is $1000 per month more than her monthly income. She’s afraid she’ll run out of money. I’m not the least bit concerned. My wife and I will be in an inpatient mental health facility long before that happens. I hope we can hold out long enough to raise the toddler first.

    Seriously, my mother really could run out of money, but she has to move to a nursing home first. And the assisted living is the best way to keep her out of a nursing home.

  13. Lynn McGuire says:

    Incidentally, why is YouTube now using https?

    The entire internet is slowly moving to HTTPS. The amount of scanning, sniffing and snooping going on out there is just amazing. Chinese Hackers Infiltrate New York Times Computers:
    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/31/technology/chinese-hackers-infiltrate-new-york-times-computers.html?_r=0

    Just because you are paranoid does not mean that they are not out to get you.

  14. OFD says:

    I hope they blow the Times away; useless toilet-paper rag for a very long time now. Good riddance.

    And in these times, paranoia is likely to increase rather than decrease. And yes, there are entities, corporeal and otherwise, out to get us.

  15. ed says:

    It seems that HTTPS isn’t quite as secure as people think…

    http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2013/01/man-in-the-midd_6.html

    “This is an area where security concerns are butting up against other issues. Nokia’s answer, which is basically “trust us, we’re not looking at your data,” is going to increasingly be the norm.”

  16. OFD says:

    Reading through the various comments is also somewhat enlightening; one that struck me is how Nokia (and no doubt others) sell their tech to countries that are not necessarily our best buds. But that’s been the deal for a long time; stuff sold to foreign regimes can end up mangling and killing you and/or your children when y’all are off on one of them neat foreign war adventures. And now we’re gonna go ahead with selling jet fighter aircraft and other weapons systems to the hadji regime in Egypt, you know, the one that has its police strip and beat protesters in the street, treats women like shit, and burns our flag? Arab Spring, baby! Dig it!

    Any thoughts, Barry? HILLARY? Any comments, Susan? Would any of you care to volunteer for next-of-kin KIA notifications?

    I didn’t think so.

  17. Lynn McGuire says:

    “Fashion Advice at the DIA: ‘Makeup Makes You More Attractive'”
    http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/washington-whispers/2013/02/01/fashion-advice-at-the-dia-makeup-makes-you-more-attractive

    “A week after women were cleared to serve in combat, Defense Intelligence Agency employees got a different message. “Makeup makes you more attractive.” “Don’t be a plain Jane.” “A sweater with a skirt is better than a sweater with slacks.” “No flats.” “Paint your nails.” “Don’t be afraid of color.” And, “brunettes have more leeway with vibrant colors than blondes or redheads.””

    I do not know where to start with this nonsense.

  18. Robert Bruce Thompson says:

    Well, anyone who believes women should be in the combat arms is either a moron or has a political agendum.

  19. Miles_Teg says:

    Hm, I guess I’d better not mention the names of some lunatic left Democrat atheist bloggers…

    For many reasons I don’t want women in combat roles, but I’m okay with them on reasonably secure platforms like warships and AWACS type aircraft.

  20. Miles_Teg says:

    “And now we’re gonna go ahead with selling jet fighter aircraft and other weapons systems to the hadji regime in Egypt, you know, the one that has its police strip and beat protesters in the street, treats women like shit, and burns our flag? Arab Spring, baby! Dig it! ”

    I say sell it to them, at full price. None of the discounts that might be given to friends like the UK, Australia or Cannukistan. We may as well have their dough. Just blow the stuffing out of them if they cross the line.

  21. Miles_Teg says:

    Lynn wrote:

    “I do not know where to start with this nonsense.”

    Nah, I don’t agree. Looking nice is good for self confidence, and morale. I agree with everything except “No flats.” I think flats look good, and I still stare in wonder at women who can walk around in stilettos and not fall over every 10 seconds.

  22. OFD says:

    The idea of women in the combat arms appeals to: morons who swallow whatever bullshit they’re fed in this country, and: those with the usual suspect, i.e., hard Left political agenda.

    I note that the top spec ops commander, McRaven, touts it now, and mentioned the Rangers as a neat place for women soldiers but somehow failed to bring up the Seals. I doubt Delta will be considered, either. McRaven was a Seal but has now reached political ranks and considerations.

    Bad idea, Bill; very bad.

  23. Roy Harvey says:

    Checking for picking/packing errors by checking weight can work amazingly well in some cases.

  24. Robert Bruce Thompson says:

    Yes, we weigh everything. We also use mostly subassemblies, which prevents most errors in final packing.

Comments are closed.