Canned Pumpkin Isn't

[yogi]

Maybe you knew this already. But, I would bet 99.98% of the population do not know. Canned pumpkin isn't pumpkin. It's a blend of squashes. Apparently the real stuff doesn't process well, so they came up with a look alike. It's also very legal to call this squash combo pumpkin. They are all gourds afterall, or some such fabrication. I shouldn't feel bad about this in today's world, but I've been lied to for most of my life.

http://dish.allrecipes.com/i-just-found ... cally-lie/

[Kellemora]

Hate to say this Yogi, but you are wrong this time.
Canned pumpkin is made from Dickenson pumpkins.
The Agricultural board has defined Dickenson pumpkins as pumpkins and not called a squash, although pumpkins are in the squash family, so is cucumbers, gourds, and a lot of other things.
There is NO butternut squash in a can of pumpkins either!
That misnomer about canned pumpkin's not being pumpkins has been going around for decades and is not true.

[yogi]

Hmmm. I never heard that rumor before and I have no reason to doubt it's veracity any more than I do to doubt your comments. I can say, however, the last canned pumpkin I used didn't really taste like pumpkin. Then again, squash doesn't have much flavor either. I'll have to look into Dirkenson pumpkins to see if they are specially bred to be squashy and tasteless. LOL

[Kellemora]

Taken from the Snopes website: Although this is not where I got my original info from. I just knew when the comments popped up years ago that Canned Pumpkin was REALLY Pumpkin. I was looking for the FDA article that stated same but did not find it.

It is true that Dickinson pumpkins are less photogenic than common decorative varieties, but it is false that the bulk of canned pumpkin is a blend of winter squashes such as butternut. It is also true that the FDA allows for sweet squash blends to be sold under the label of “pumpkin,” but that doesn’t appear to be the case with Libby’s, who use Dickinson pumpkins.

In short, pumpkin pie aficionados can rest assured their canned pumpkin of choice is indeed a pumpkin and not a blend of other squashes masquerading as such — although perhaps not a type that could double as a carving pumpkin.

[yogi]

My understanding is that the run of the mill jack-o-lanturn pumpkin is too gritty and fibrous to be made into pie filling, or to be canned for that matter. I guess that's why Libby went through all the trouble to develop a variety of it's own. They have a huge stake in appearance and taste. Then again, how many cans of pumpkin can they be selling? Not enough to make all the work worth it I'd think.

[Kellemora]

You wouldn't believe all the items that have Pumpkin in them.
Everything from Baby Food to Vitamin Pills. Many Vitamin A pills are made from Pumpkin Extract.

The big orange Pumpkin that we associate with Pumpkin Jack-O-Lanterns, is normally raised for decorative purposes, not necessarily for eating. However, it is this type of pumpkin that salted pumpkin seeds come from too, as well as some paint pigments. The rest usually winds up as hog feed, hi hi.

[yogi]

Pumpkin extract isn't exactly the same as pumpkin itself. I don't think it much matters what the fruit itself looks like in that case. Canned pumpkin seems like a limited use food. Bakeries would use it and this is the time of year home bakers would sock up on it too. But that's it.

Speaking of surprise ingredients, many years ago I had a need to use the famous Preparation-H for a temporary Hemorrhoid problem. By the time I got around to seeing my doctor at the next check up, I had discovered what the main active ingredient is in Preparation-H. Out of curiosity I asked the doc if he knew. No, he had no clue. It's shark's liver oil. You can check out the label on the box which is how I found out. That all worked out fine, but I'm still wondering in my mind how did they find out sharks' liver oil would shrink Hemorrhoidal tissue? Maybe some egg-headed scientist knew what chemicals it would take, but how did they find out the liver of a shark has that chemical? Amazing.

[Kellemora]

I've seen a lot of really odd ingredients in different products. But you usually have to look up the name they show on the ingredients list to find out what the common names are.

Out of context here, but I started the Install, set SDA7 as the partition for the install.
Then it came up and asked were to put the boot.
I wasn't sure so selected the Windows bootloader SDA2 on this machine.

[yogi]

I'm not sure what you are trying to accomplish there, but the correct location of the boot loader is critical. It all depends on your desired end results. In my epic failure, the Ubuntu installer overwrites the Windows bootloader. This is what gave me several weeks of near migraine headaches. LOL

In general there is no specific location for the bootloader, but by far the most common place to put it is on the device header and not on any given partition. That would be /dev/sda for example and not /dev/sda2 or /dev/sda7 or any other numbered partition. The reasoning behind this is that any of the partitions could be deleted and take your bootloader with it. Then you are SOL without a way to boot. Putting it at the device itself keeps it in a safe place.

All I can tell you is that if you misplace GRUB, hopefully you know how to recover the MBR or EFI partition, whichever you are using.

[Kellemora]

I tried it on SDA with no number, and Windows overwrote it.
Tried it on SDA2 an EFI partition I created for the bootloader, Windows overwrote it.

This computer does not have Bios, it is UEFI only.
Ironically, I can go into something similar as the Bios utility for making changes, only it is called HSM (hardware systems management). There is a setting to emulate Bios called Legacy something or other, but I left it set to EFI boot.

Since I will probably never use Windows 10 for anything, especially on that computer, I think I will just reformat the disk and install the three Distro's I like to have available to try out before installing them on other machines.
I do like Linux Mint Maya 18 a little better than 19. Seems like in the process of making things easier, they actually make things harder, until you get used to them.

For me though, Debian is still my #1 choice. It must be good since it is what Ubuntu is built on, and then Linux Mint is built on Ubuntu, sorta.

Linux may meet its match with Zircon. But that is a big IF there.
Mickey$oft tried going universal and failed.
And if Google adds lock-down features to Zircon or over-controls it, it will fail also.
But right now Zircon has great promise as the Kernel that will run everything.
We'll have to see it to believe it though, hi hi.

[yogi]

Windows 10 will only work in UEFI boot. That tells me the computer you are using must be configured for UEFI. Part of the EFI standard is to provide legacy BIOS as an option. It appears that most computers purchased within the last ten years or so are UEFI, with a BIOS legacy option plus a compatibility mode to do both (CSM).

There can only be one boot manager in a UEFI device (hard drive). As I've been telling you for a while now, and as you discovered on your own, Windows takes over the management. The boot manager decides to which bootloader to hand off booting, and that is why Linux, or anything else, installed side by side with Windows must go through its manager. It does not have to be that way. You can set up UEFI so that the old familiar GRUB is the trusted boot manager. In that case the Windows selection will be part of a trusted GRUB boot manager.

An alternative to using the Windows/GRUB bootmanager would be to do what I did. Use USB memory sticks for stand alone Linux distributions.

If you don't care about Windows at all, then it's probably best that you scrap the license and reformat the hard drive for whatever boot scheme that servers your purposes. Heck, you can do what I did with the tower and make it legacy MBR. The only issue there is that Linux is gradually shifting over to UEFI. At the moment there is a huge chaotic mess with a little MBR and a little UEFI depending upon what you download. Some people love that "flexibility" in their Linux. You seem to favor legacy BIOS and MBR booting so that it would be a very simple multiple boot scheme if you dumped Windows altogether.

If I ever heard of Zircon I don't recall what I heard. LOL A universal kernel is sombeody's dream, but you can't believe the big three will actually go that route, Windows is coming pretty close to a universal OS. It runs on anything from cell phones to cloud servers. Of course it's Windows and not really universal in spite of them adding Linux to their mix. I don't see Zircon being any different.

[Kellemora]

Google is writing a new OS from the ground up, and they started with the Kernel they named Zircon.
I think the current program in development is named Fuschia, but don't quote me on that.
The scuttlebutt is it will run all Windows, Android, and Linux programs, including the older Windows programs that won't run on newer Windows OS's.
Supposedly, it will analyze a program and provide the best settings for that program and then run it.
Albeit, they are not that far along with their OS yet, hi hi.

[yogi]

I read an article recently stating Google has made a major breakthrough in quantum computers. Apparently they found a way to run them at temperatures well above absolute zero. Given the power implied in such computers, I would say they could do everything you say about Zircon and more. Combine quantum speed with artificial intelligence and it may very well be possible to make one hand held device that can run any computer operating system ever invented; simultaneously even. LOL While this all sounds fantastic, I think it's just somebody's dream. The potential might be there, but the dollars to make it happen aren't.

[Kellemora]

I hear ya Yogi!
I read an article a couple of years ago about a biological computer chip.
That threw be for a loop. That's all I need is a CPU I have to fertilize and water every week, and keep the weeds out, hi hi. Or maybe they meant a living organism like a brain. So will I have to feed it, or share my soda pop and steak with it?
I'm sure that is not what they meant, but it was still interesting to read.

It's like them calling the flat image on a 2D screen 3D, and by doing that, what are they going to call REAL 3D when it comes out?

[yogi]

It's like them calling the flat image on a 2D screen 3D, and by doing that, what are they going to call REAL 3D when it comes out?

They will be called holograms.

A while back I read where some researchers were successful at transplanting human memories. A lot of people have memory issues and the theory is that they would benefit from erasing the old ones and replacing that with new ones. This would be wonderful for people suffering PSTD, for example. The author speculated that eventually this technique could replace an entire brain worth of memories. For example, the memory of Warren Buffet could be transplanted into your brain and you would take on his identity. It's way to mind boggling to think about, and I've not read anymore about that research. But, why not? It may not be too many generations off into the future before we can buy a package of memories and download them into our brains. It sure would be the high cost of a college education.

[Kellemora]

I think I mentioned quite a while ago now, about the cube TV.
It used lasers to make a dot of color where the two laser lines paths crossed.
Worked almost like the normal raster scan TV but instead of 2D on a screen, it was real 3D, because it had depth.
The laser lights ran several screens one right behind the other, and relied on our eyes to remember the dots, just like on a normal TV.
I've seen a few laser light shows that worked sorta that way, but instead of projecting crossing laser beams to make the dot, it was just a laser hitting layers of fog placed one behind the other, outdoors, so a breeze could mess them up a little.
Still neat to see though. It was not clear like a TV since you were looking colors on a cloud of fog. But worked great for the cartoon characters movements.

I could see memory mapping as something that will happen in the future.
And it sorta goes along with my belief on hour our brain works, which I've mentioned before also.

I've also seen some things in medical journals about using lasers to do things inside the body that does not require an incision to get to an organ to make a repair. Again, this is done by using several lasers and where the lines cross is where it cuts or burns or whatever. But something like that to be put in use is still 20 or more years away.

[yogi]

You have heard, I'm sure, about virtual reality and augmented reality. For the most part this involves wearing some kind of goggles that give you a true 3-D view through the lens. Micorsoft is going whole hog with it's HoloLens for Business concept. How in all hell that works out is beyond me. But, wearing the goggles can put you into the same room as a surgeon, for example, so that you can study how to perform the procedure as if you were actually doing it. This same concept applies in other business as well. Take batting practice as an example. You will see the pitcher and the ball just as if you were out there in Wrigley Field with a bat. Do enough of that and your real batting skills will be much improved. Of course, the greatest push is in the porn industry. You won't just be watching porn in the future. You will be part of it. Well, maybe not YOU in particular, but you get the idea of what can be done with a 3D lens.

[Kellemora]

Yes, but you can't get up and walk around to either side of the screen and see what's going on behind the scenes.
They only give the illusion of 3D and only up to a point.
However, I've used some Virtual Reality headsets for games, back when my bro was in that business, and some of them truly are amazing. However, even that is not real 3D either, it just allows you to change your focal point.
Sorta like those 360 degree images you see on the internet every so often.
If they took that 360 degree feature and combined it with the color separation used to give the illusion of 3D you would swear it really was 3D, hi hi.

There is a Holographic display at ORNL that has you scratching your head every time you see it.
And each time we go out there, they have made it even better than it was before.

Another exhibit they had using lasers was an old Tin Lizzie car you could literally take apart piece by piece, even the motor to see the parts inside. But it is not like doing so in real life, because if you remove like the door for example, it doesn't fall to the ground, it just moves out away from the body. Then you can turn the door around and take of the inner liner and arm rest to get to the components inside. Each time you remove a piece, it just moves away from the item, like as if it was an engineering drawing sorta.
Before they had the car, they had a Stage Coach you could take apart. I played with that for over an hour, hi hi.
On the stage coach, you could take each part and turn it around to see all sides and both ends, and even zoom in to like an exploded view of something tiny, like the ends of the leather that tied the back flap down, or the rivets on the roof rack, etc. Oh, speaking of the rivets, you could take the rivet out keeping its installed shape, or see what it looked like before it was set into place and expanded. When you went to put the rivet back in, you saw it as a new rivet, and then it automatically showed the tools placed behind it and the hammer hitting to expand the rivet. And you could do this while keeping the wooden rails hidden from view, so the rivet was up there floating in air as the tools expanded it.
As I said, really neat displays there.

[yogi]

I've only read about virtual reality and augmented reality; never had an occasion to actually get involved with it. The people describing their experiences and plans for the future go well beyond what you talk about at Oak Ridge. Apparently some prototypes are out there, and as I say Microsoft is into it big time, but there doesn't seem to be anything that would pass for real ... yet. Gaming in 2019 is not what it was in 2009. I've been tempted to dive into that "surround" experience but I'm still trying to figure out UEFI. LOL

[Kellemora]

I was always told a Supercomputer can only do ONE THING at a Time, and programs are run sequentially back to back.
Apparently that is not true anymore. Leastwise not since the built the new Supercomputer at ORNL, they still have Titan, and it apparently is running many different tasks at the same time. Either that or the speed is so fast you don't know other things are running.
By my way of thinking, perhaps they no longer delegate the entire system to a single task and set aside some areas of the computer to run continuously running programs, such as the displays in the Discovery Room and elsewhere in the Visitors Labs.

I know a Mainframe can run many different programs all at the same time, much like a desktop.
But Supercomputers were only supposed to do one thing at a time.
Unless I'm really missing something here, which is most likely, hi hi.

It's been well over ten years since I've seen or used a Virtual Reality Game, so I imagine they have changed a lot since then.
One of the games my brother had was a golfing game.
Let me step back, he used to have one with a projection TV type screen you stood in front of, this was fairly cool.
But the Virtual Reality one, you wore a headset and stood in an raised platform with rails all around it.
You didn't actually hold a full sized club like you did with the early games with the large screen.
However, the club you hold has weight to it, and feels like the club you selected from the golf bag.
I figured out how they did this right off. There is a weight inside the short handle you hold, and if you select a Driver for example, the weight moves to the end of the handle you are holding. An Iron around the middle of the handle, and a putter close to the back of your hand. This is how they make it feel like a real swing.
Of course, with the glasses on, you do see the club you selected, and your feet too if you look down, hi hi.
It's like being on a real golf course, only you walk about 30 mph to where the ball landed, hi hi.
You do actually move forward, but you were on a conveyor belt, that only moves about a foot when you step, but to your mind through the video headset you moved nearly 30 feet per step, hi hi. That part was hard to get used to at first.

As an aside: I watched a video of a guy assembling large machine parts, yet it was all robotics doing the work.
The worker had a pair of gloves and if he needed to wind in a screw, he would pick up the screw or bolt and wind it in with his fingers, although he was not physically touching anything. The robot arm was doing the actual work.
In the video, he picked up an engine block with one hand and three fingers, like it was made of air.
Amazing the things they can do now!