Coinstar vs. the Kitchen Scale

How much was in those change jars on top of the fridge? I weighed the coins and then ran them through the counting machine at QFC.

Coin Weight Mass ea. Est. by wt Coinstar Diff.
Quarters 621 5.670 110 = $27.40
Dimes 742 ± 3 2.268 327 = $32.72 328 +0.3%
Nickels 1212 5.000 242 = $12.12 243 +0.4%
Cents 3251 2.500 1300 = $13.00 1243 -4.4%


Pretty close really. Older pennies have been substantially heavier so that's probably why the penny count by weight was high.

I didn't run the quarters through the machine since I use them for laundry. Sadly, despite the Beach Boys' financial planning advice, $47.72 is not enough to buy a sporty new Chevy.

I guess I could also have stacked each coin type (slid them into a v-shaped groove in something (quiet, [personal profile] m_pig)) and measured their length. That might have been better for the pennies.

Other things found in the change jar: two Eisenhower half-dollars, one bicentennial; some Canadian quarters and Japanese 50-yen coins; and an Australian two-cent piece which appears to have a firelizard on the back.

SEXY OUTINGS

HUMP was pretty good the other couple of years I saw it. It's playing this weekend and next and is about two blocks from my apartment, so I should see it again.

And so should you! Not sure what showing jinian and I will be going to, but if you are going we should at least make a token effort to coördinate. (For practically any value of "you" likely to be reading this entry.)

And for subject-line-pluralism's sake: Isabella Rosellini is doing her thing at the Moore this coming Monday. Also fun! More acceptable for mixed company! Many insects!

(no subject)

I seem to be basically voting the Stranger ticket again this year. Sawant, yay; McGinn, sure; not-Pope; not-Eyman; um… I might abstain on some of the offices I'm utterly ignorant about.

I'm on the fence about 522 and 19 though. What do y'all think?


I-522 as written seems pretty useless. It doesn't really tell you what you need to know; a useful version of that law would tell you what transgenes are in your food. As it is, it seems like at best I-522's labels would be like the universal and universally ignored notices on California buildings telling you that somewhere inside the building is some toxin or carcinogen. Except most GMO foods aren't even bad. I-522 doesn't even require disclosure of which ingredients in a processed food might be GM, which could give you a hint.

The arguments for it, in my mind, are that (a) it might be an intermediate step to getting better labeling, and (b) Monsanto's put a lot of money into the campaign against it, and if Monsanto's ag'in it it can't be all bad.

The other argument against I-522 is that most people avoiding GMO food are not avoiding it for good reasons and that labeling would simply encourage people to continue to make that ill-informed decision. But I think it's better to fight that particular battle with education and information rather than secrecy. (I know, I know, I'm an incorrigible optimist when it comes to things like that. Ask me about nuclear power.)

So as usual with initiatives I'm torn between favoring a halfassed measure that might be heading in a good direction vs. rejecting it in hopes it comes back in better form later.