This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------010102010606030801080503
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

How come every  thing seems to come around to politics?



Olin Lathrop wrote:

>
> No that's not common sense, just plain wrong.
>
> What you are really saying is that the tolerance is below the level 
> you care
> about.  That's fine, and deciding what the level needs to be is part of
> enginnering, but you don't have and never can have 0 tolerance.
>
> There's enough public misundertanding about this concept that it's 
> important
> (in fact irresponsible not to) for us engineers and scientists to 
> state it
> correctly.  This sort of erroneous statement and imprecise use of terms
> needs to be squashed whenever possible to avoid even more confusion and
> misunderstanding by non-technical people.
>
> Lest you think this is just theoretical agument, consider that
> misunderstanding of this issue almost caused bad public policy.  
> Politicians
> are fond of saying they support a "zero tolerance" to drugs.  A few years
> back when this was codified into law, the original wording literally 
> set the
> acceptable level of drugs found at zero.  For example, the Coast Guard 
> would
> have been able to sieze your boat for finding any drugs at all.  Can you
> guarantee that there are no opiate molecules on your boat?  Nobody ate a
> poppy seed bun 2 years ago and dropped a seed?  If you set the level at
> zero, then you are really setting it at whatever the tolerance of the
> equipment on hand is to detect it.  This can vary widely making the
> application of the law unfair, and it also changes over time as equipment
> gets more and more sensitive.  I believe the law was eventually 
> modified to
> spell out a specific quantity before it was passed.
>
> I'm sure there are other examples where this misunderstanding has caused
> real harm.
>
> So please, do yourself and everyone else a favor and stop making 
> rediculous
> claims of "0 tolerance" parts.  Since you're presumably a technical 
> person
> on this list you really should know better.
>
>
> ******************************************************************
> Embed Inc, Littleton Massachusetts, (978) 742-9014.  #1 PIC
> consultant in 2004 program year.  http://www.embedinc.com/produCTS


--------------010102010606030801080503
Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=utf-8;
 name="rindesigns.vcf"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: attachment;
 filename="rindesigns.vcf"

begin:vcard
fn:Robert I. Nelson
n:Nelson;Robert I.
org:RIN Designs
adr:;;P.O. BOX 373;RIPON;WI;54971;USA
email;internet:rindesigns@charter.net
tel;work:1-(920)-229-7152
tel;home:1-(920)-748-7443
note;quoted-printable:Custom design and building of small electro mechanical devices.=0D=0A=
	AUTOCAD work ver2002 
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
version:2.1
end:vcard


--------------010102010606030801080503
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

--------------010102010606030801080503--