Your pet peeve, technical or otherwise.

[SiliconWizard]

Oh, yeah. In a similar vein though, think of how people abuse the term "race" when meaning "species".

[coppice]

Smallest galaxies have about a hundred million stars.

The smallest Galaxies are those little bars they give you as a snack on airlines....  at least on the airlines that still serve you any food at all.

[TimFox]

Oh, yeah. In a similar vein though, think of how people abuse the term "race" when meaning "species".

"Human race" is a common phrase in English.
"There's a smile on my face
For the whole human race
Why, it's almost like bein' in love"

[eti]

We ain’t a “species”, we are human beings of the human race. There’s also NO different races, only different ethnicities. A different race implies a different creature. This is highly flawed.

[james_s]

Of course we're a species, Homo Sapiens.

[TimFox]

One definition of a "species" is a group that can interbreed.
In one of my favorite Lincoln-Douglas debates before the Civil War, Douglas argued that there was a "natural antipathy" between the races.
Lincoln countered with the data from the 1850 Census about the rate of interracial births, and suggested to Douglas that the antipathy was not strong.

[Nominal Animal]

According to dictionaries, "race" ≃ "subspecies"; for example, "A group of sentient beings, particularly people, distinguished by common ancestry, heritage or characteristics".  "Species" has a biological/taxonomical definition (here), and while it is often defined via having fertile offspring, it is not the only accepted one.

While humans are currently the only species we categorise as sentient beings, that may change in the future, as our understanding grows.  In mythology and fiction, we have always had many.  "Race" is one of the terms used to indicate groupings and associations within one, just like "kin", "clan", "family", et cetera.

Essentially, "race" is an almost arbitrarily defined fraction of some sentient species.

[TimFox]

Over the last few centuries, with respect to the species homo sapiens, "race" has been more of a political concept than a biological concept.

[IDEngineer]

While humans are currently the only species we categorise as sentient beings...

Who says that? The definition of sentient (from Merriam Webster) is "responsive to or conscious of sense impressions". Strictly speaking some plants qualify (example: Venus fly trap) and certainly all ambulatory creatures do. I suspect what's trying to be expressed here is the ability to consciously engage in some degree of abstract thought, as opposed to purely instinctive/reactionary behavior. But even by that definition domesticated mammals such as dogs and cats would be considered sentient. And I can tell you from personal experience diving with dolphins that they are both sentient and intelligent by anyone's definition.

Not starting an argument here, just wondering what source is arguing that humans alone are sentient beings. The evidence to the contrary is literally all around us, every day.

[Nominal Animal]

While humans are currently the only species we categorise as sentient beings...

Who says that?

Laws in various countries around the world; see animal rights by country or territory.  Only 32 countries in the world have recognized non-human animal sentience.

Many religions, including Hinduism, Buddhism, Sikhism, and Jainism, as well as many prehistoric religions do recognize non-human sentient species, so this isn't "new" or particularly "advanced" among humans; it has, however, been quite slow in application in practical law (timeline) in most jurisdictions.

I do agree that there is definitely sufficient evidence in support of many species being sentient and even sapient.

[SiliconWizard]

We ain’t a “species”, we are human beings of the human race.

Yes we are. "Human race" for designing the human species is a familiar english term; it has no scientific meaning.

As tor races themselves (which, if you don't like the term, would make your sentence above absolutely even more meaningless ), that usually means subcategories of a given species that have some different classifiable characteristics and that can interbred. That we would call that "ethnicity" instead of "race" (that we have less trouble using for other animals - as though we weren't ones) doesn't change anything.

Now of course we know that the species barrier can sometimes be broken (even if that's relatively rare overall), which is called hybridation. So the classification as species is not always that clear cut, but it has proven to work fairly well.

[TimFox]

There is scientific evidence for interbreeding between homo sapiens and homo neanderthalensis.
https://humanorigins.si.edu/evidence/genetics/ancient-dna-and-neanderthals

[AndyBeez]

I was asked by someone, "should my [lamp] power pack be bulging like this?"

I will leave it to you guys to ponder just how many pounds per square inch of over pressure were inside this 'puffy lipo'. Hint, the expanded cell had ripped the case's fixing screws through their plastic holes. Either way, the pressure inside makes leaking alkaline batteries seem tame by comparison.

The 'bigged up' 3553120 cell was one of three connected in series; the 3S pack was welded to a BMS. The other two cells were still functioning correctly. This cell was the one connected to the positive rail, which might have been significant?

For 24 hours the cell was discharged defused through a tungsten MES lightbulb, outside and on a concrete block. At some time the battery went flacid - possibly pecked by a curious bird. The voltage had fallen from ~4V to ~1V.

Pet peeve? Puffy Lipos are a potential hazard to modern living, especially in the second usage market. Watch out for online listings that say, "battery is just a little bit swollen", "case is slightly curved", "bulging does not affect the e-scooter's range" and "I have been told by an electrical expert that batteries expand like this and this is normal."

You'll note I measured the battery cells will plastic calipers.

[IDEngineer]

That's not exclusive to LiPo's. APC UPS's regularly stress their AGM batteries to the point that their expansion makes removal by normal means impossible. I've lost count of how many APC rack enclosures I've had to almost completely disassemble to remove AGM's that were just 12 months old (regularly scheduled replacement). I never bothered to study the voltages they applied to them but they cannot have been very "smart" no matter what label was on the front cover. Chargers/maintainers like Battery Tenders, etc. have never done this in my decades of experience.

[Ranayna]

Ugh, APC... For some reason my Boss still buys them. Even though the damn UPSes are the main reason of failures in our distribution cabinets.
At least modern APCs have the batteries fully enclosed in their own metal cage per pack. So less danger of stuck batteries

[IDEngineer]

At least modern APCs have the batteries fully enclosed in their own metal cage per pack.

These (~15 years ago, "SmartUPS" rackmount product line) also had their batteries fully enclosed in (solid panel) metal boxes within the enclosure. Theoretically you could remove a front panel and just slide them out. Except when the charging "profile" (I suspect a too-high steady-state voltage, not "smart" at all) puffed the batteries to the point that they could not slide out anymore. I even tried putting thin straps around the new batteries but they'd get so tight even that wouldn't pull them out.

[Ed.Kloonk]

puffed the batteries to the point that they could not slide out anymore. I even tried putting thin straps around the new batteries but they'd get so tight even that wouldn't pull them out.

 

That's annoying.

[SeanB]

APC does the double whammy, slight overvoltage to increase capacity, and also will charge at maximum discharge current when the batteries have been discharged, so they will always tend to gas off the electrolyte.  Got one for free, just needed 2 new batteries, so use car batteries, because those at least are in a separate case, and I can top up the water in them. Time for the monthly check.

[eti]

Of course we're a species, Homo Sapiens.

"Species" implies we are ANIMALS, and we are not. GOD made us above the animals.

[pcprogrammer]

Of course we're a species, Homo Sapiens.

"Species" implies we are ANIMALS, and we are not. GOD made us above the animals.

Tuuuuuuuuuuuuut 

Biology 101.

[james_s]

"Species" implies we are ANIMALS, and we are not. GOD made us above the animals.

Of course we are animals, we're certainly not plants, fungus or minerals. You know, we've decoded much of the human genome and humans share much more genetic code with other mammals than not. It's rather self absorbed and narcissistic to the extrme to believe that humans are somehow that unique and above al other animals that we have so much in common with. Take a domestic cat for example, they have all the same internal organs as we do, their brain structure while smaller and missing a few bits we have is very similar to ours, they can have depression, bipolar disorder and other mental conditions that humans have, they are sentient beings with memory, feelings, and emotions just like ours, they dream when they sleep just like we do. Primates such as chimps and apes take the similarity to another level. Humans are primates, primates are mammals, mammals are animals. This is just basic biology, period.

[Simon]

Of course we're a species, Homo Sapiens.

"Species" implies we are ANIMALS, and we are not. GOD made us above the animals.

This is a technical forum, so any reference is based on science, in this case we are talking about biology. Biologically man is classified as an animal end of. Religion has no baring here.

[eti]

Of course we're a species, Homo Sapiens.

"Species" implies we are ANIMALS, and we are not. GOD made us above the animals.

This is a technical forum, so any reference is based on science, in this case we are talking about biology. Biologically man is classified as an animal end of. Religion has no baring here.

 Since God created literally everything, including the laws of physics, and Science, existence, itself, et cetera, I’m not sure how you were able to isolate them.

[Ranayna]

*sigh* I really wanted to sympathize with you, after your post explaining your recent issues.

But you are doing it again. You are again deliberately bringing up controversial topics that are not wanted here.

[Ed.Kloonk]

So I had a 'revelation' today. 

A few pages back in this thread, I participated in a m.2 compatibility rant.

Tomorrow I had planned to hit my computer shop and take the controller, the m.2 sticks and not leave until I found something that works.

I pulled the spec sheet for my WD drives and the info on the usb -> m.2 ctlr. I read the info again. It should work... So I plugged it in and...well 

What a difference having a modern kernel makes. The new one is LTS like the old one was but the new one speaks to m.2 controllers apparently.

In 20 years, I've never needed to have a new kernel to get hardware to work. With my stuff I'm the one usually yelling at the kernel devs and others to "put that back!"