Record high temperatues in Texas

Hottest day on record in Texas Panhandle; fire threatens Los Alamos
[Via Dr. Jeff Masters' WunderBlog]

The hottest temperatures in recorded history scorched large portions of the Texas Panhandle, Oklahoma Panhandle, and southwestern Kansas on Sunday. Amarillo hit 111°, breaking its hottest day-ever record of 109° (set just two days previously, on June 24). Borger, Texas hit 113°, smashing the previous hottest day-ever record set on June 24, 2011 of 108°. Dalhart, Texas had its hottest day on record, 110°, beating the 108° on June 24, 2011. Dodge City, Kansas tied its all-time record with 110° (last seen on June 29, 1998). Dodge City has temperature records back to 1874. Yesterday saw the hottest temperatures of the month for Texas with 116.2° at Childress, Northfield, and Memphis (all in the panhandle region.) These readings are not far from the state record of 120° set at Monahas on June 28, 1994 and at Seymore on August 12, 1936. 

[More]

Not only record drought in the state but some terribly high numbers. Pecos, Texas has had no rain since September of last year – normal is over 4 inches. Amarillo’s temperature of 111ª was the hottest it has gotten in recorded history back to 1892. In San Angelo, 22 of the first 26 days of the month were over 100°.

It is going to be a miserable summer. I wish some of that water in South Dakota wold make its way to Texas.

Getting arrested for breaking no law? – all on film

by Bruce R

Two Reporters Arrested For Daring To Photograph/Videotape Public DC Taxi Commission Meeting
[Via Techdirt]

It really is quite amazing how so many authority types these days can’t seem to comprehend the idea that people can and will take phones and record public events. Sinan Unur alerts us to the news of how two reporters were arrested in Washington DC while attending a public meeting of the DC Taxi Commission, which was meeting over a planned medallion system for taxis (used in many other cities, but somewhat controversial due to the ability to artificially restrict the market). Apparently, a reporter by the name of Pete Tucker was arrested for taking a photograph, and then Reason’s Jim Epstein filmed the arrest and subsequent outrage by pretty much everyone in attendance. He then tried to leave, and the police tried to get his camera and then arrested him as well. You don’t see him arrested in the video, but the woman at the end who declares that he has no right to film her (false, since this is a public place) apparently is told by a police officer that Epstein’s phone would be turned over to her, which raises questions as to why police would be handing a phone over to someone else.

[More]

And the nice way to get around the First Amendment – a cop stating they will arrest you for not following a direct order to leave, even if nothing illegal was done. Then you are not arrested for taking pictures but for refusing to obey an officer.

Of course, it will all be cleared up in court after a lot of money but the cop will never be censored and the government’s ability to crush your First Amendment rights can continue unabated.

We will continue to go through these things until everyone realizes that cameras at an open public meeting will always be there and that there is no reason to keep them out.  THey are not disruptive in any real sense of the word. The law will eventually get settled. But I do love what the immediate response of authority is.

That never changes, no matter which party is in power.

Physicists who do not play baseball

by basheertome

Baseball, cheating, and physics
[Via Boing Boing]

Some good news for Sammy Sosa fans still whispering, “Say it ain’t so.” Back in 2003, Sosa was caught using a corked bat—a normal wooden bat hollowed out in the center and stuffed with lighter cork material. That embarrassing incident did happen, and it does go against baseball rules. But, according to physicists at the University of Illinois and Washington State University, a corked bat probably doesn’t offer much of an advantage. Sure, Sosa technically cheated. But he didn’t actually cheat in a practical sense, they say. At least, not by altering his bat.

There was some anecdotal information from players that there’s something like a ‘trampoline effect’ when the ball bounces off a corked bat,” says Nathan, one of the authors of the new study. So the researchers hollowed out a bat, stuffed it with bits of cork and fired a ball at the bat from a cannon. If anything, the ball came off the corked bat with a slower speed than off a normal bat. Less velocity means a shorter hit. Their conclusion: the trampoline effect was bogus.

But there was another way corking might work: a corked bat is a few ounces lighter than an unadulterated one, and a lighter bat means a batter can swing faster, which means he can generate more force and hit the ball farther. Right? Not quite, as it turns out.

A batter indeed can swing a lighter bat faster, but a lighter bat has less inertia. So there’s a trade-off, says Lloyd Smith, an associate professor of engineering at Washington State University and a co-author on the paper. By once again firing a ball at a bat at WSU’s Sports Science Laboratory, the researchers found that a heavier bat still hit the ball harder (and therefore farther) than a lighter, corked bat. “Corking will not help you hit the ball farther,” says Smith.

[More]

As anyone who has played baseball really knows, a corked bat is not about hitting the ball harder. It is about being able to make a long bat lighter so that one can hit balls that would be impossible to hit with a heavy long bat.

Baseball needs to use a hard wood – so that it does not break all the time. But these are dense and heavy. Lighter woods are easier to swing quickly but more prone to breaking. (Part of the reason aluminum bats are so popular is that a long bat can still be very light.)

So there has always been a tradeoff between a long, but heavy bat that allows one to cover the entire strike zone and a shorter but light bat whose light weight lets one wait longer before starting the swing.

Corking a bat changes its density, allowing one to get the benefits of a shorter bat while maintaining the plate coverage of a long bat.

A batter using a corked bat can make good contact with a much greater range of pitches than one using either a short, light bat or a long, heavy one.

The power comes from the steroids. The cork just let them get a bat on more balls.

The researchers were really studying the wrong question. Can a corked bat be swung easier and faster? Does the change in density actually make a difference?

Killing replay value of games will create a death spiral

by wwarby

Capcom crushes replay value of new game by making saved games permanent
[Via Ars Technica]

When you open your brand-new copy of Resident Evil: The Mercenaries 3D today, you may find something interesting in the manual. “Note: Saved data on this software cannot be reset,” you are warned. When you play the game and your progress is saved, there is no way to take it back. That is your game forever.

Let me explain why this is so infuriating if you’re unclear on just how hostile this is to gamers. Once you’ve beaten the game, you can’t erase your progress and start over. If you want to loan the game to a friend, they won’t be able to start their own game from the beginning. You may be able to trade the game into a store or sell it, but I wouldn’t suggest buying it from someone used, since you won’t be able to start from the beginning and unlock all the content yourself.

“Secondhand game sales were not a factor in this development decision, so we hope that all our consumers will be able to enjoy the entirety of the survival-action experiences that the game does offer,” Capcom said in a statement given to Giant Bomb.

[More]

The inability to return to point zero after starting a game would kill its replay value for me and for many others. I like to try different strategies, check things out, see if I can ‘win’ fast or slow, etc.

But this thing, whose only real purpose seems to be to prevent anyone else from every replaying the game after one starts, will simply kill the game.

To these companies, resale is worse than piracy. I really think that these sorts of games – requiring large development teams and costing $50 or more – are dinosaurs and will quickly be overshadowed by small app economy companies. We are already seeing some of this disruption.

The gaming  industry will never be the same.

Why you should lock your phone – police searches

Arizona Police Told To Search Arrestee iPhones For Anti-Police Apps
[Via Techdirt]

Last week’s big LulzSec (pre-disbandment) dump of Arizona police info apparently included some documents telling police to search the iPhones of arrestees for specific apps, including OpenWatch, a simple app for recording people (targeted at authorities) without it displaying on the phone that they’re being recorded. The police were also told to look for speed trap identifying apps and an app that lets people spoof caller ID numbers. As we’ve discussed a few times, there are some legal questions about whether or not cops can just search your iPhone during, say, a routine traffic stop, but tragically a few courts have said it’s fine. That seems rather troubling, as the cops can search your phone after just a routine traffic stop… and then potentially get you in more trouble just because they don’t like the types of apps you have?

Separately, the article notes that the Justice Department has been sending around notices to local law enforcement, telling them to be aware that iPhone users have a feature that lets them remotely wipe their phones. This is part of the mobile me service, and the wiping has a perfectly legitimate purpose: to let someone who has lost their phone or had it stolen, to wipe the data from the phone. It’s pretty useful, really. But, to police who are seizing phones and want to search them later, they’re scared that evidence can be destroyed this way, so the Justice Department is telling them to store the phone in Faraday bags to keep them disconnected from any network, so they can’t receive the “wipe” signal.

[More]

If they really, really want to get your information, they will get it but it is a good thing to make it a little harder.

But I do wonder what the police would do if they found some of these apps – apps that are perfectly legal to possess. What possible legal reason would there be to look on someone’s phone for these apps?