Canon PowerShot G9
ƒ/2.8
7.4 mm
1/20
200
The world’s largest chocolate fountain:
2 tons of chocolate, white, medium and dark
500 ft. of piping
27 vertical feet from lower level pump room
2 years of planning and design
Bellagio
16 responses to “Chocolate Bath”
-
you could’ve made a puzzle with this… I am still trying to figure it out. One question: the chocolate mixes when falling? If so, what do they do later with it, throw it away?
-
Alieness: doh! right you are. I am shooting straight up into some ceiling mirrors. I do not think they mix the streams. What to do with the chocolate bath is left to the imagination…
mmoody: Heh, I just bought a big 3D TV yesterday. My favorite sight at the show was an array of LED lightbulbs from Taiwan that screw into regular sockets and run off regular AC and look like regular bulbs… For cooling, they use baby oil! The inside of the bulb is filled with oil, and that gives heat transfer to the glass and a nice light diffusion effect. Brilliant.
-
Baby oil? Isn’t that extremely dangerous and toxic compared to, say, mercury? Imagine if one breaks, you’ll have a baby oil spill on your hands. Practically have to call in FEMA. Heh.
-
Are you trying to get ideas to make your baby-photography business more profitable by unconventional means, leino?
-
To steer this back to the chocolate — if I only read your description Steve I would have pictured the chocolate falls in Willy Wonka. I’m disappointed it’s not.
-
After getting a whopping $1300 PGE home bill a few months ago, I started converting my 100+ 50 watt Par 20 Light bulbs with the new LED light-bulb replacement replacements They use 1.5 watts. Granted the Light is slightly harsher/dimmer than the traditional bulb but should save me significant cost/energy over time. Next step, a serious look at Solar Panels. Ideas anyone, products or vendors?
p.s. I recall seeing the Chocolate Fountain at the Bellagio YEARS ago. Hopefully the chocolate has been cycled since. ;o)
-
I am no expert, but let me offer a couple thoughts. Offering a new search engine will unlikely solve the problem – they can always go back to google or worse if they become curious.
A couple solutions: you could try to lock down the environment. Our home network comes through a sonic wall router and it can implement a decent job of content filtering. Not perfect, but the ideal ones include some blacklist you can add to.
Which brings me to the second method – some parenting around where they can and cant surf (e.g., only the walled gardens of Club Penguin… then wikipedia… etc.). You can use the "history" tab in the browser to see if they are following your whitelist guidance, but don’t let them see you checking that source; it needs to be your secret audit source.
Of course, if your kid becomes a hacker, all bets are off. 😉
-
It’s strange, but in 10 years of using heavily the internet, living in it, I have almost never came across explicit content per chance. I guess that I wouldn’t even be able to put in a statistics of search the times it happened because it was so little. And I search for whatever you might think of. including cracked/pirated programs, etc, which is always an obscure realm… This brings me to 2 reflections every time I hear about these kind of problems: 1) the person is actually searching with the correct words to find what they are getting, 2) because they are searching for that, they actually click on the links(you always have that previous option to NOT click if there’s a dubious link), which reinforces hypothesis (1).
Which leads me to conclude that however that complicated or inconvenient it is, you should do be with them when they do the research. I would be intrested in knowing of real searches they made, which words and which kind of results google retreived. Google is far from perfect, and the more in these past years they have been not paying much attention to the search engine as they are trying to conquer the Earth… uhm, but in general it’s rather safe.
I agree with Steve’s suggestions too.
-
Uhum, that seem to have been done on (evil) purpose to make offensive content be found within a safe search. Objectively you found what you were looking for, the problem is that offensive content was tagged and labeled as what -inoffensive- you were looking for.
I don’t think there’s an automatic solution for that, but the "report this" kind of mechanisms in the social media websites to allow people to report and censor these kind of misbehaviour. But it cannot be muchly prevented, unfortunately. It’s like if your kids read an X magazine each month, and one month somebody puts within the cover of the real magazine for kids, pornographic content on purpose… how can you prevent that? It’s really unlikely to happen, but if it does, and if it’s your kid to get the magazine… what to do? you just report the event so some measure can be taken, but the damage was done.
That’s why I say that there almost always one middle step before reaching to the display of the content, if you get it in a search result you might be able to realize it is offensive content and avoid clicking on it. What you might say to your children is that it’s also important that they don’t click in suspicious or potentially offensive results because many times it can be harmful for the computer as well, not just for the morals of the viewers. Those places can start a chain reaction of downloads of trojan horses and viruses and a lot of crap you don’t want to have in your machine.
It’s rather unlikely that they will have problems again taking some minimal prevention procedures, I guess. And they are very smart kids, to find the way through it, I know. =)
Leave a Reply to angry shock Cancel reply