I'm a mechanical engineer with clients who make huge quantities of such
mixes onbgiant kneaders (for example the flubbery mass at the center of golf
balls). After seeing pictures of their equipment / manufacturing processes
on their blog, the Sugru ladies appear to be a
tiny unit making a product
Hey Sarbajit et al
All that is true. What I am interested in, however, are its
applications in my media.
Practical hands-on usefulness for a wide range of situations.
Those applications are now possible for a wide audience of people who
make things
because the marketing connected
- info
Nicholas Thompson wrote circa 10-05-09 03:35 PM:
The metaphor I want to examine is that between the manner in which the
different strains of pigeons in Darwin's coop came to be the way they were
and the manner in which different species of plants and animals came to be
the way they are.
OK.
I think you're giving me way too much credit, here. I'm not a deep
thinker in any sense. So, when I say that metaphors are required to be
fuzzy in order to be metaphors, I'm (trying) to say something very
practical.
Metaphors are quick and dirty ways to wonk someone out of a way of
thinking...
It's this stuff. http://www.formerol.comSugru appears to be the
consumer marketing arm for the F.03 / sugru products. They say you can
order it with other properties.
I also like this stuff. http://www.solarcomposites.com It would be
nice to have a less obnoxious-to-work-with
Excellent. Great lead, thanks Carl!
I like that the company was developed by a woman in art school.
Nice blend of art, science and technology.
... Will pursue some work with them and let you all know if something
interesting arises.
Tory
On May 10, 2010, at 12:10 PM, Carl Tollander wrote:
Tory, Carl,
One of the great delights of this list is that I can, from time to time, find
myself in the midst of a conversation concerning which I don't have a clue what
we are talking about.
I wouldnt have it any other way.
n
Nicholas S. Thompson
Emeritus Professor of Psychology and
Russell Gonnering wrote circa 10-05-09 07:39 AM:
Reading the text of the bill:
http://www.azleg.gov/legtext/49leg/2r/bills/sb1070h.pdf
I see no statute that entitles a show me your papers demand unless it is in
the course of investigation of a crime. The straw man argument that police
in
Glen-
You are viewing reality through your own terministic screen, as do all of us.
We seem to be using a different definition of complexity. Mine is in line
with the Stacey diagram of agreement/certainty or the Cynefin Framework of
Snowden that deals with cause and effect. Perhaps therein
Russell Gonnering wrote circa 10-05-10 02:02 PM:
We seem to be using a different definition of complexity. Mine is
in line with the Stacey diagram of agreement/certainty or the Cynefin
Framework of Snowden that deals with cause and effect. Perhaps
therein lies the difficulty, and why I see
Russ, and others
I am continuing to do my penance for having uncritically circulated an
opinion gleaned from NPR and/ or Left Wing Rant Radio.
I have already conceded that my belief that border state gunshows are a
significant source of modern Mexican drug lords armament is ... um
shakey.
Glenn-
It would be refreshing to find a venue in which my definition of complexity
(and the one described by Snowden, Stacey, Arthur, etc.) can be discussed.
Interconnectivity and interwoven things are present in complicated and
even simple systems as well. The difference is in how cause
Russell Gonnering wrote circa 10-05-10 03:36 PM:
It would be refreshing to find a venue in which my definition of
complexity (and the one described by Snowden, Stacey, Arthur, etc.)
can be discussed. Interconnectivity and interwoven things are
present in complicated and even simple systems as
Glen-
Why are you so sure you know what is in other people's minds? Your continual
use of the annotated point-for-point refutation of why I am wrong and you are
right just proves the point, doesn't it? Reductionism a a wonderful tool, for
the complicated. But the complex is something
Russell Gonnering wrote circa 10-05-10 04:56 PM:
Why are you so sure you know what is in other people's minds? Your
continual use of the annotated point-for-point refutation of why I am
wrong and you are right just proves the point, doesn't it?
I'm neither sure what's in others' minds, nor am
15 matches
Mail list logo
