Nostrildamus 45
Scientific American has a column about a guy who has the duty of smelling materials that go into space, to make sure the astronauts won't end up gagging from odors that might disperse in the atmosphere on Earth but be concentrated in the Shuttle or space station.
*SNORT* (Score:2)
dave
How does one even apply for this sort of job? (Score:3)
Please list your previous positions...
I used to smell for NASA. Using my sense of smell my duty was to decide if a certain smell might cause astronauts to gag on the smell in a more concentrated environment.
Hmm ok. How will this help the janitoral position you are applying for?
I can tell you on a scale of 1 to 10 how much this shit smells?
Sounds good. Your'e Hired.
Arathres
I love my iBook. I use it to run Linux!
Re-Fried Beans? (Score:1)
WEll, (Score:3)
Talk about a job with built-in practical jokes... (Score:1)
Can you imagine the practical jokes the NASA folks could pull on these guys?
to cover THIS story... (Score:1)
Smell like a man (Score:1)
"Wow, you smell like a man, ummm well, the others don't smell any better, you may enter"
That's what we get when congress cuts the budget (Score:1)
It also makes me wonder if these people are required to smell the astronauts.
Re:How does one even apply for this sort of job? (Score:3)
How does:
Directed and supervised team engaged in assessment of olfactory hazards and irritants in controlled environments used in aerospace industry.
sound???
But remember (read the article), this guy is a "chemistry laboratory technician" whose job 90% of the time is probably a little more serious. (read the article). I can't imagine that this is his full-time position, although I suppose coordinating the panels and tabulating results could generate a lot of administrative work.
Re:How does one even apply for this sort of job? (Score:1)
Lower quality in Scientific American!!! (Score:1)
The biggest problem is that the articles do not seem to get the "review" that they got previously or the editing for style over content has pulled out some of the meat. Even the latest news blurbs have gone from scientific facts reported to "yet un-published papers".
I just signed up for a 3 year subscription right before the change (well thats one thing I can change this week.) Personally I would rather get Popular Science now than Scientific American. I am going to probably just have to get a subscription to Science or Nature now.
Stephen "Old Fuddy-Duddy" Smoogen
A roman hero has come to life (somewhat) ... (Score:1)
No mental strain? I think not. (Score:2)
It must take a bit of concentration to rank smells like that, even on a scale of 0-4, as we are not really designed for it . Unlike sight or hearing, smell is really a background sense - we are not used to paying analytical attention to it.
I wouldn't want to do the job for too long at once, both from the sense of smell getting jaded, and concentration wandering.
Roy Ward.
What if he gets a cold? (Score:1)
reminds me of... (Score:1)
He got famous on a german TV-show, where he was able to tell the make, model and year of a dusin cars, just by smelling them (he was blindfolded).
Wine experts need keen sense of smell (Score:1)
An Interesting Story.... (Score:3)
Three guys in a small, sealed space for 12 days, using toilets that where essentially hi-tech plastic bags. Makes you shudder just to think aboout it.
Re:reminds me of... (Score:1)
And, at the same time, he was able to tell the race of the car owner's neighbour's dog...
What is so funny? (Score:1)
Smelling stuff before they go to space? Yeah it makes senses. This is no different than say a wine taster, perfume tester(?) and so on. I am sure they have people to make sure the food and water taste okay, machines ain't too loud, tools ain't slippy when used with gloves etc. Things that concern every one of our senses.
What this story is really about is how difficult it is to travel to space, how many things that need to be take into account for every shuttle launch [slashdot.org]. Grow up people, this is not news for kids.
====
Re:True purpose (Score:1)
This would be a severe impediment to such things as a comercial public space station or that much touted space hotel idea from back in the late 60s.
Can you imagine having 200 guests paying for their week in space, then demanding their money back because the 201st guest refused to bathe, and stunk up the whole place...
Oh, and I thought security was bad when taking my liggage through customs now... "I'm sorry sir, your leather coat stinks when I spray water on it, we can not allow you to bring it into space" the agent says after sniffing all my belongings...
Oh, and a new kind of extortion: "You can rent a storage locker here for $2000 per day or I'll be happy to hold on to the coat for you."
Space travel opens up so many new possibilities...
--
Re:Lower quality in Scientific American!!! (Score:1)
Suprizingly... (Score:2)
Re:Lower quality in Scientific American!!! (Score:1)
--Fesh
Re:How does one even apply for this sort of job? (Score:1)
Re:WEll, (Score:1)
Yes (Score:1)
Listen to "Panty Rap" on Tinseltown Rebellion to hear him .. uh .. requesting donations. Go to this site [www.arf.ru] for actual pictures of the finished quilt.
---
Seriously... (Score:1)
Re:Lower quality in Scientific American!!! (Score:3)
The new editor seems to have decided that Scientific Americans are as dumb and brash as the worldwide stereotypes suggest, and that he can't go wrong by lowering it further. (P.T. Barnum would suggest that he's right.)
John Rennie has also decided to preach from his new pulpit, and while I don't disagree much with his politics, they have absolutely no place in a magazine that's supposed to be presenting science, not politics. The previous editor had been a touch more subtle in making his political viewpoints known, but I had been finding that distasteful for the last few years. Now, instead of simply an editorial on nuclear power or an article on the uses of placental blood, the feature articles themselves are on the ethics of using medical waste, or treaty rights arguments over the use of Yucca Mountain as a permanent nuclear storage facility. Wake up, guys, Oprah and Larry King have already covered those topics. Let the Law Review cover them. Stick to the science, please.
What do you suppose happened? Is geek-chic such an "in" thing that carrying an unread Scientific American in your briefcase is now a fashion accessory? Perhaps these weenies got puzzled when they bothered to crack one open and found polysyllabic words in a column marked "Mathematical Recreations"?
Damn, and I just hit the switch on their new perennial no-spam-just-bill-my-Visa after tiring of 15 years of "OHMYGOD, your subscription will expire in 11 months! Resubscribe now to avoid the loss of just eight more issues!"
John, disgusted too.
Re:Why not a dog? (Score:1)
The problem with useing a dog for this is that dogs don't find any smell disgusting. You really need a human nose and human brain to do this particular kind of work.
Re:Why not a dog? (Score:1)
Why would we need anything more than a human with a rather sensitive sense of smell? We aren't interested in making sure that no dog gags at the odor: we want the poor humans to feel OK.
anyone else remember mirsky's WoW? (Score:1)
Re:No mental strain? I think not. (Score:1)
Their job in NJ is to track down offending smells that might originate at factories. They work in teams of 2, and walk the town. They write detailed reports, take wind samples and try to locate the offending smell. The way the TV show pictured it, it seemed that it was a difficult job, not as easy as it sounds. Also, I recall, they get paid pretty good, I think it was 40K plus travel. Not a bad take for working with your nose.
Another TV show I saw was the NOVA episode about perfumes. Those people were located in labs in France with thousands of different smells that they mix to make perfumes.
ONEPOINT
Coming Soon to /. (Score:1)
Sign me up for the smell-tested Slashdot. A cadre of brave Nasalteers can prevaluate the articles in the submission queue and categorize them by odor.
This article, for example, might rate as "olidous, with a mildly mephitic aftertaste."
because... (Score:1)
Re:What good... (Score:1)
Re:No mental strain? I think not. (Score:2)
Re:Why not a dog? (Score:2)
Most of us are, yes. But then that's the trick isn't it? You can't have a dog tell you that something stinks because dogs cannot talk. You could build a sniffer machine to test the smell, but then it ends up having a wider range of detectability than a human nose, and it still can't tell you if something smells really awful.
Nope, if you want to see if something smells bad to a human being, then you pretty much are best of (economically and effectively) using humans as testers.
Re:Why not a dog? (Score:1)
FWIW, companies who make personal care products like Gillette and Procter & Gamble have people who do all kinds of weird crap to make sure the stuff does what it's supposed to. I remember a Nat'l Geographic article a while back about the sense of smell in general. It featured "armpit sniffers" at a company that did research for P&G in Ohio.
Re:Why not a dog? (Score:1)
Open! (Score:1)
Blown Just A Wee Bit Out of Proportion (Score:2)
Okay, yeah, so these guys do their job to protect that 'stronauts. Nice. Much more important is the testing that goes on beforehand for things that could kill them. A nice story, but a bit, well, fluffy.
I work with the guys at Marshall Space Flight Center who do toxicity testing pretty regularly. Offgassing is a huge concern, up there with flammability. [Stuff that doesn't burn in Earth's atmosphere will burn in the ISS/STS atmosphere, especially ISS, which runs at 25.3% oxygen.
Why not using a digital noise? (Score:1)
NASA Lays Off Nasal Specialist! [Silly post] (Score:1)
This guy probably gets the sack every time he gets a cold, haha.
Yeah. And can you imagine how hard it is to get another job when your major qualification is telling people how much things stink?
Heck, you'd even have trouble being a bum; I don't think I need to tell you how unsuccessful wearing a " Will smell for food " sign around your neck would be...
Re:No mental strain? I think not. (Score:1)
ONEPOINT
thank you for the morning laugh
Re:Lower quality in Scientific American!!! (Score:1)
For me, the worst began when Rennie put his picture in the editorial section of the magazine. That's changed now, but only because they've removed the editorials completely.
My subscription petered out this month, though I did email them my reasons (and a suggestion to change the name to "Reactionary American")