Your Nerdy Platform for Overshare

[Desiree_Radcliffe]

So, the idea of this thread is that you have however long a single post to make your version of a TED talk about something you super geek out about. You have one post to hold the attention of your audience, so make it count. It does not have to be well-researched academic stuff. Just something a little niche that you are knowledgeable and crazy about, and could talk about all day if someone would allow it.

That said, those of you who know me a bit know that I am a fiend for the Victorian period in literature, art, and culture. I have my thread, Despair and Overshare, where I randomly talk about some of that and other things. I am really big into debunking Victorian myths that people created because it made them feel better. For instance, there was a lady who claimed that the vibrator was made so that physicians could coax quicker orgasms out of their "hysterical" patients, because their fingers weren't working as well. For some reason, we all thought that the vibrator was created for this super perverted but also weirdly clinical purpose. However, this was not a thing that people actually did. Pelvic massage was never, ever a thing for any medical issue. And there is literally zero historical evidence that it was ever practiced. However, during a short period in the 1880s, clitorodectimies (a form of FGM), were a thing that some doctors thought would be a great idea for women who decided to masturbate too much. Very quickly, there was medical consensus that that should not be a thing, but the fact that people thought it should be a thing is scary. Also, corsets. Most people didn't tight lace and they were used in main to give the garments shape. The impossible figures you see in illustrations weren't a thing, and also Victorians did the equivalent of Photoshop to make it look sexier. Also, we get the first photographic porn from horny Victorians!

Thanks for coming to my TED talk. I can't wait to hear yours!

 

[dawn_of_night]

I'm hear to support a friend.
I love yarn, I love to look for crochet patterns that I will never use to make things with yarn that I have plenty of, I love to collect the speciality yarns and sometimes just let them or feel them, I hardly ever use a pattern to make a project, and if I do, by the time I've made the 2nd one I'm not following the pattern and I'm literally "winging it" into a yarn barfed master piece of brilliance.
Do you get geeked about patterns for things? But then not follow them?
On a tangent... I'm also this way with food and cook books ...
So, is it a personality trait? Is it hobby based, I'm just my yarn geek family could agree or disagree with what I said about patterns.... I literally have so many...thanks for listening

 

[Beholders_Eye]

In between ordinary living (eating, sleeping, chores, etc.) I live in two different worlds.

The first is golf. When I am on a golf course (conditions vary), there is peace, blue sky, green grass, trees, the pleasure of a good shot. And the irritation of a bad one! When I was very young, my father worked for a golf course (way long ago) and we lived in one of the two old houses on the property. So I was around that milieu from the get-go. The smell of newly mowed grass. Cleaning my clubs, knocking the dirt from the golf shoes. The anticipation of being there; the tiredness afterwards. A halcyon experience.

The second is a total immersion in erotica. Pictures, GIF's, Lit stories. Preparing for a hedonistic mind fuck. Arranging my setting (chair, towels, lube, filling the computer monitor with lascivious pictures, a Lit story....so many open windows and tabs). Surrounding my mind with sexual thoughts and feelings. Being aroused by the next picture I find. Letting myself imagine I am in the story; fucking, feeling, kissing, insane with lust. Edging for hours, not wanting to stop to eat. The Total exhaustion afterwards. A halcyon experience.

Two worlds, each a part of me.

P.S. In oversharing, I also oversimplified. There are other worlds I visit because I read a lot. Fiction, science, religion, biography. But the main events are the ones I described...

 

[Starscream_UK]

I can tell you everything about Generation 1 Transformers comics & cartoons, everything from Marvel to Devil's Due, Dreamwave to IDW. I could do a sixty minute presentation with no prep whatsoever. I can also break down the intricacies of the Child Support Act of 1991, and the works of H.P Lovecraft (not at the same time you understand...)

As much as only one of those is any use in my day job (guess which one), lots of the memory retention quirks for the other two aid the third in a way that makes me the human advice line in my organisation. It's a blessing and a curse.

(Don't start me on all things paranormal and events of High Strangeness as well...)

 

[Xerxes82]

I can tell you everything about Generation 1 Transformers comics & cartoons, everything from Marvel to Devil's Due, Dreamwave to IDW. I could do a sixty minute presentation with no prep whatsoever.

Prove it. Identify my newest acquisition:


Just foolin'! I like the cut of your jib, sir. As my shelves will attest.

 

[Starscream_UK]

Ah, Lord Straxus of Darkmount! I wish he came with a little Scrounge with the special arm! There is no other like it!

 

[LovelyLadyLicker]

I love the idea of this thread. It’s a great place to infodump and self-stimulate.

This one is about Lord of the Rings (LOTR), which I’m sure many of you are far more knowledgeable, but my fixation is mainly geared toward Gandalf. I love how the only reason the trilogy lasted so long was because Galdalf - an immortal being of a race called Maiar - decided to toy with mortal action figures while his immortal colleagues and opponents were trying to convince him that it was just a phase. Once, he told Sauron - a fellow Maiar who is created to be [theoretically] stronger than Gandalf and the greater villain in this story - that he’s learned to appreciate the “little” things in life, i.e. Hobbits who literally had nothing to do with this war, but Gandalf wanted to inspire b/c that’s essentially his schtick. And heck, maybe he felt bad for giving poor Bilbo mental health issues and decided to retry with Frodo like some failed father who screwed up the last kid and is optimistic about the next one maybe not turning out as bad. So yeah…if anyone is wondering, that’s why the eagles didn’t just take the protagonists straight to the volcano. Also Gandalf really had these poor mortals freaking out about his death, like NO, Olórin is immortal, save yourselves! Shame on you dude

Lastly, Aragorn is the reason why I have ridiculously high standards for my romantic and nesting partners, what a imperfectly perfect guy

 

[Starscream_UK]

I love the idea of this thread. It’s a great place to infodump and self-stimulate.

This one is about Lord of the Rings (LOTR), which I’m sure many of you are far more knowledgeable, but my fixation is mainly geared toward Gandalf. I love how the only reason the trilogy lasted so long was because Galdalf - an immortal being of a race called Maiar - decided to toy with mortal action figures while his immortal colleagues and opponents were trying to convince him that it was just a phase. Once, he told Sauron - a fellow Maiar who is created to be [theoretically] stronger than Gandalf and the greater villain in this story - that he’s learned to appreciate the “little” things in life, i.e. Hobbits who literally had nothing to do with this war, but Gandalf wanted to inspire b/c that’s essentially his schtick. And heck, maybe he felt bad for giving poor Bilbo mental health issues and decided to retry with Frodo like some failed father who screwed up the last kid and is optimistic about the next one maybe not turning out as bad. So yeah…if anyone is wondering, that’s why the eagles didn’t just take the protagonists straight to the volcano. Also Gandalf really had these poor mortals freaking out about his death, like NO. Olórin is immortal, save yourselves, shame on you dude

Lastly, Aragorn is the reason why I have ridiculously high standards for my romantic and nesting partners, what a imperfectly perfect guy

Holy shit, so Gandalf and the Fellowship was the fantasy equivalent of Tony Khan and AEW Wrestling? It all makes perfect sense now...

 

[darkelf9]

Ok just found this thread on a Lit version of a TED talk. Not sure who this guy TED is but will give it a shot for any nerds who want to know something new or realise they were doing the thing mentioned in the subject matter without realising it. I'm doing this intro so I don't use up the word count on the actual subject matter post as I've come up against the word count on this newer version of Lit stopping some of my posts until I do hack and slash job on the ones rejected.

A little about me. I used to lecture in various forums as one of my roles in leadership and management roles in my career. I spent a majority of my career in leadership roles and half of it in management and senior management roles. Now retired. Regardless of the size of the audience whether it be a couple of hundred people in a forum or a dozen people in a conference or training room the objective of keeping people engaged is the same given the attention spans of most adults they reckon 40-45 minutes. In my experience it's more like 30mins at a time and at some point people's minds will wonder and I've been to my share of boring course sessions. It always helps to adjust your lecture or presentation to the audience otherwise people will drift off. So I'll try to keep things relevant to a Lit type audience. Also I am an Aussie and we don't stand for anyone's bullshit so for any hecklers out there, I will cut you off at our knees. Now that the intro and T&C's are understood. Let's see if I can make things make sense to any lurkers or contributors to this thread. I know I'm kinda breaking the rules but well I'm a Darkelf.

 

[darkelf9]

Quality vs Cost

So one of the first questions I ask people is to tell me what they consider to be a good quality car. Most will say a well known high end brand name believing the brand name is a sign of quality where as your average suburban car is considered of a lesser quality car and even smaller cars are of an inferior quality. The truth is they are all good quality cars regardless of cost. You might pay for an expensive car thinking it is better quality when in fact your purchase has more to do with your perceived status in society that gives you an ego boost. As for 4WD vehicles being purchased to pick up the kids from school thinking you have purchased a superior quality car based on the sales pitch of safety, well you've been taken for a ride. All cars must past the same safety quality standards which are not guided by price. So your kids are just as safe in the family sedan as they are in our overpriced 4WD at $30k more. Nothing to do with quality, because every car purchased regardless of price has defects in it. In fact everything you purchase again regardless of price has defects in it. From that expensive dress and shoes to that 4k or now 8k TV you purchased. This might shock people and I'm sure people will say well of course a Ferrari is superior in quality to a mini cooper. Well that's because those people don't understand the word "quality". If you buy a $5 T-shirt and $50 T-shirt both are good quality. One is a practical purchase the other is an emotional purchase. Both T-shirts are probably made in the same country by the same company. They aren't going to change the quality of the T-shirt based on the price you pay. Their processes nor their machinery are capable of building that extra quality into the different end products. That $200 pair of jeans you purchased based on the sale and brand name is the same as the $40 pair of jeans available from Target or Kmart. Both are good quality jeans. Again there are people reading this saying "this guy is wrong". I used to get that a lot until people went away and thought about what I said, then they would come back to me and say I was right. I'm also used to walking in hostile areas in some of the jobs I've had. Just got to let people vent sometimes before you can get their attention. Then sometimes I just had to tell them who I represent and what I could do and that would calm things down. Just have to read the room.

So why can the things I mentioned in the above paragraph be true. Well because when you purchase something regardless of what it is, you are the one that determines the quality of the purchase even before you bought it because you have defined what you want and a price you are willing to pay for it. The quality of something is based on the purpose for that purchase not the price of the item or service. You may have heard the term "Fitness for Purpose", well that is a Quality Assurance term meaning in layman's terms, is the quality for the intended purpose of use. The retailer has already built the item or service with a quality standard in mind, at which they can make a profit. Then you come along with your own determination of quality based on the price you are will to pay. They might tell you that dildo or vibe or that sexy underwear is top quality, but it's you that decides the quality. Keeping in mind even their most pricey lingerie has defects in it yet it's still for sale. So before you purchase anything you first need to decide the quality you want based on the price you are willing to pay. Whatever you are willing to pay is the best quality. Now the job of sales people and marketing is to convince you that the quality (price) set by the manufacturer or service provider is the quality you need. It's essentially a con.

In the world of products and services, perfection doesn't exist. Going back to cars. They could build you the perfect car only problem is you couldn't afford it and the company would go out of business because they can't sell enough stock to cover their costs and make a profit. So what is a defect and at what point does it lead to a defective item. Well that is determined by what is called Acceptable Quality. As I have mentioned everything produced has defects in it. For an item to be a defective it has to meet the reject number. All items produced has an Accept and Reject number for defects. If the item reaches the Reject Number it becomes a defective and removed from the manufacturing line at which point one of two decisions is made. Can the item be fixed the term for this is "Reworked" or does it need to be scrapped. Both decisions are based on cost. How much will the rework cost both in time and money or is the item too far gone and must be scrapped. Depending on the phase of the process some scrapped items can be taken back to the raw material stage or disposed of. When you see the term "Seconds" these are items that have failed to meet the Acceptable Quality standards but can be sold for a reduced price. For example you may see a coffee mug in a Seconds bin or in one of those Reject Stores. Those items meet the basic Quality Control standard of holding liquid and the fucking handle won't fall off. The reason it is in the Seconds bin could simply be because the colour of the coffee mug didn't meet the colour standard for the Acceptable Quality. It may be the wrong shade or have an external surface imperfection due to the kiln firing process, otherwise it's fine to buy and use. If it had a big crack in it and the liquid leaks out then it is a defective item and would be scrapped in which case it wouldn't be on the shelf in the store anyway.

This next one on "Quality" gets even those not involved in the world of "Quality" into arguments. So 100% inspection doesn't mean 100% quality. Back in the before times companies would employ lots of people in white coats inspecting ever single item produced thru multiple check stations also containing lots of people. They were all doing 100% inspection with the theory being that by the end of these multiple 100% quality check stations you would get 100% quality goods, which never happened. Why? Well firstly everyone in this process of 100% inspection were humans. And as I mentioned in the intro people's attention spans are limited. Men are rather crap at repetitive tasks which is why women were used and are used in a lot of production lines even today. The number of defectives also increased at the start and end of the week. The least amount of defectives occurred mid week. Again why? Simply because humans have lives and they think about those lives more just after a weekend and just before a weekend. The reason why this 100% inspection was discontinued was due to cost. The cost of that quality product was too high plus after that time and expense it did not guarantee a higher quality end product. So basically quality costs money. There are still people in the "Quality" game who are in different camps and all believe their theory is the right one. Some will tell you 100% inspection is the only way to guarantee good quality. Those in the Quality Control world don't agree with those in the Quality Assurance world on how to guarantee good quality and they all think those in the Quality Management world are using witchcraft.

So to wrap this up. Quality is based on what you can afford not what someone says it is. Quality costs money. I could of gone into technospeak and quote guys like Juran and Deming but that would probably end in a snorefest for most people on Lit. I'm used to writing technical papers on all this stuff but I learned a valuable lesson once as a team leader from one of my team members, who would come back to me saying I was using too many big words in the process documents. I was used to conversing with people at my level so simplifying language was not common. So anyway I used this team member to see if what I wrote could be understood by someone not from my background. It made me change my style of writing but when needed I could always switch it up. It taught me to write to the audience I was providing the info to and in some cases writing the same thing for the different levels of knowledge. One reason my lectures were well attended in those larger forums.

If anyone has questions, just post them here. If I get a positive response I'll post another one if not then this will be my last post on this thread. Either way I hope it all made sense.

 

[37_ttej]

Just in case the good people of Lit think I am just a douche, I am also a nerd.
I like reading, music and computer games.
And trains.

So here for your reading pleasure (if you have been brave enough to continue after the opening paragraph) is some information about my favourite locomotive, Gresley's LNER Class P2.



Sir Nigel Gresley designed the P2 Class of 2-8-2 steam locomotives for the London and North Eastern Railway (LNER) to work heavy express trains between Edinburgh and Aberdeen. Six locomotives of the class were introduced between 1934 and 1936, numbered 2001 - 2006 and given names from Scottish lore.

2001 - Cock o' the North (sounds very Lit, but is actually a colloquial epithet for the Clan Gordon chief)
2002 - Earl Marischal
2003 - Lord President
2004 - Mons Meg (the name of a famous cannon at Edinburgh Castle, not Meg's mons pubis)
2005 - Thane of Fife (which which you will be familiar from Shakespeare's Macbeth)
2006 - Wolf of Badenoch

The Class P2 were given streamlined fronts in 1936, similar to that of the Class A4. Gresley's successor Edward Thompson later rebuilt all of them (boo!) into the LNER Class A2/2.

Class leader 2001 Cock o' the North, was built at Doncaster Works, with Lentz rotary-cam actuated poppet valve-gear and a double-chimney Kylchap exhaust. The boiler barrel design was the same as Gresley used on his A4 Pacifics, but with a larger firebox. Subsequent engines had design modifications:

• The other five locomotives had Walschaerts valve gear and piston valves (as did the A4s). 2001's was later replaced with the same valve gear.
• The problematic ACFI feed water heater on 2001 was never fitted to the other locomotives.
• 2003 had its external design modified to include a wedge-shaped front similar to the A4 Sliver Link to improve smoke lift. The earlier engines were subsequently modified similarly.
• 2004 was fitted with an experimental butterfly valve blastpipe bypass, later replaced with a plug valve and higher bypass pipe diameter.
• 2005 did not have the Kylchap double chimney.
• 2006 had a different boiler design, with a longer combustion chamber and firebox heating area and a Robinson superheater.
  

Shortly after being put into service, 2001 was tested with a 19 bogie carriage train of 649 tons on a return journey between Kings Cross, Grantham and Barkston. It hauled the train at an average speed of over 50 mph, with peak speeds of over 70 mph. Peak output exceeded 2000 horsepower. As such, the P2s remain the most powerful express passenger steam locomotive ever built for a British railway.

Although often described as a mixed success, the P2s were a bold step forward for British locomotive design. They had a reputation for heavy coal consumption, but this was only really a problem with 2001 when it was fitted with its original poppet valve gear. Their long wheel-base was also considered unsuitable for the route they were intended to service. As with all locomotive designs, the P2s were a trade-off between conflicting requirements. As a result, all six locomotives were rebuilt by Thompson in 1943/44 and withdrawn from service between 1959 and 1961.

The P2 Steam Locomotive Company was formed in 2013 with the aim of building a new P2 Class locomotive 2007 named Prince of Wales. The build is yet to be completed.