December 9

Why are green olives sold in glass jars and black olives in cans? I happen to like black olives much more than green -- but are they considered second class olives? DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 00:41, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to take a wild guess here: That because green olives are packed in vinegar, they are not canned, because the vinegar might interact with the metal in the can. [Wrong guess] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:11, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Straight Dope answers this one pretty thoroughly : Why is it that green olives come in glass jars but black olives come in cans? APL (talk) 01:54, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Aha, it has to do with prepping the ripe olives to protect from botulism. Nothing to do with vinegar interacting with the can. In essence, they're cooked in the can, which they couldn't do with the glass unless it was Pyrex or something, which would probably make the container more expensive than its contents. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:24, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I get my black (Kalamata) olives in glass jars. Kalamata olives IMO are the only ones worth buying. The standard black olives are tolerable on pizza or salad, if you're in a low-expectations mode, but I can't imagine buying them separately at the supermarket. And green olives let's not even talk about. --Trovatore (talk) 02:36, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting post -- what else do you do with olives, other than put them on pizza or in salad? DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 02:48, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

All sorts of things. Put them in an omelette. Make a toasted cheese sandwich (extra-sharp aged cheddar, habanero chiles, a little avocado, and Kalamata olive). Or just eat them straight. I wouldn't ordinarily bother doing any of those things with the cheap black olives -- the habanero would completely overwhelm them, and eating them straight would be only because I was hungry and couldn't find anything better. --Trovatore (talk) 02:56, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I forgot to mention the tomato-on-the-vine in the cheese sandwich. That went without saying, didn't it? --Trovatore (talk) 02:57, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Black olives are OK on a pizza, green olives are tastier in general. I'm reminded of an old vaudeville-era joke: "We didn't raise olives, but we made them. We knew how." "How do you 'make' olives?" "You take green peas, put them in vinegar, and when they swell up they are olives!" ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:47, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Green olives are "tastier" in the sense that they taste like vinegar. If you like vinegar, and want to chew on something at the same time, I suppose that's fine. But they have almost no taste of olive. You get much more of that from even the cheap black olives. --Trovatore (talk) 02:51, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

They're both OK. Black olives have a mild taste. I don't mind the vinegariness of green olives. You're talking to someone who likes lutefisk, so my tastes are broad. But black olives seem to work better when included with other things - like on a pizza. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:35, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You don't have to mind the vinegariness, but you surely admit that it's impossible to taste any actual olive in a green olive. --Trovatore (talk) 03:42, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I truly didn't know. I just assumed that's the way they taste, even when sliced and embedded in olive loaf cold cuts and the like. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:50, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Kalamata olives take the olive taste that the cheap black olives only hint at, and bump it up several notches. That's why they're the only ones I buy. --Trovatore (talk) 03:43, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the advice! That item is now on my shopping list. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:50, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, all these articles seem to refer to olives as "fruit" without much elaboration. I understand that it's botanically accurate to call them a fruit, just as it is for cucumber or bell pepper. But does anyone really think of olives as a fruit, in a culinary sense? --Trovatore (talk) 02:44, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Since we're discussing it, Trovatote is right on here. I would consider Kalamata olives to be outside of the usual "green vs. black" dichotomy being discussed here. Kalamata olives are brownish red, and as noted, the canned or jarred black or green olives are pretty much shit next to real olives. Any olives sold in brine and in bulk and whole with the pits still in are far better than any of those crappy flavorless ones. I'll eat Kalamatas by the handful as a snack. The local grocery store carries them in bulk; you can fill up a little pint plastic tub with them and take them home whenever you want. They also have about half a dozen other varieties to sample. Yum. --Jayron32 06:35, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Seems like they could figure out a way to pit them without damaging their quality too much. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 06:38, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely one of the more fascinating RefDesk topics of late. I was of the opinion that I didn't like olives, but listening to you folks run on makes me start to think that I've never actually had a real one. Might have to go shopping myself! 218.25.32.210 (talk) 08:37, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I might try Kalamata olives, too, if I can find them in Detroit. What do they usually cost ? (By comparison, a can of about 27 black olives in brine usually costs me around US$1.00. I like black olives, but only after I drain them and soak them in fresh water to get rid of some of the salt.) StuRat (talk) 16:49, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Probably more expensive. My local Food Lion sells bulk olives of all varieties at a "mix-and-match" olive bar (basically a bunch of barrels of different kinds of olives) for something like $5.99 a pound, so a quarter-pound tub runs me about a $1.50. More expensive than the canned kind, but then again, it is worth it. As far as how you'll like Kalamata olives, I make no guarantees. I can only say that I never liked olives before I had them myself, working at a Greek-owned pizza joint in my town. They changed my mind. --Jayron32 17:28, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you like black olives, try oil-cured olives. I think Moroccan olives are best. I like them even better than Kalamata olives as a filling for omelettes or a topping for putanesca sauce. Your local Middle Eastern grocer will have them if your supermarket doesn't. Marco polo (talk) 20:21, 9 December 2009 (UTC) [reply]

"oil-cured"? I don't think that can be right. Olives are cured either in water, brine or a solution of sodium hydroxide (hmm, tasty eh?) When they have cured they are either placed in a clean brine or an oil to further preserve them. 'Curing' olives to remove the bitter, acid and peppery taste of the fresh fruit is not possible with oil. Richard Avery (talk) 09:04, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Um, again, "fruit"? Really? Sure, botanically. But does anyone really think of them as fruit? --Trovatore (talk) 09:15, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A botanist would, no doubt. Botanists are people too. -- Jack of Oz (Speak!) 10:56, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it seems we just did think of them as fruit. Just shows how flexible the English language is. I think it is tedious to keep referring to them as olives and it is certainly weird if you call them vegetables. If you have any reasonable alternative I'll give it a go. Richard Avery (talk) 15:03, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I put [olive fruit vegetable] into google and came up with quite a few entries. Consensus seems to be "fruit". This site[1] implies that it's considered a fruit because it grows on a tree. Yet its oil product is considered to be a "vegetable oil", so go figure. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:15, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Vegetable oil is the generic name for any oil coming from a plant, be it Sunflower oil which comes from seeds (as do a large number of oils), Rice bran oil whice comes from the germ and husk, Palm oil which comes from the fruit of the oil palm or any other oil coming from any part of a plant even something like Cottonseed oil which comes from a plant not usually thought of as a food crop (although could change according to cotton). Technically it doesn't even have to be edible, but usually when people talk about vegetable oils they're talking about edible oils because non edible oils have traditionally been of limited general interest (with the increasing interest in biofuels,, this may be changing). In terms of the olives things, I have an olive tree and although I don't eat the fruit because of extensive processing required, I would call them fruit if not olives because that's what they are and there's nothing else to call them. I would find callimg them 'vegetables' odd (not so much with tomatoes or cucumbers say) and a simple search shows lots of people calling them fruit [2] [3] but a search for 'olive vegetable' shows primarily results for something with olives + vegetables or questions about whether an olive is a fruit or a vegetable [4] [5]. Even taking away the fruit questions [6] [7] doesn't show much (but works with cucumber for example) Nil Einne (talk) 02:17, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

They aren't sweet, and they aren't tart. Culinary "fruits", in my usage, have to be one or the other, and usually both. Tomatoes and avocados are culinary "vegetables". I admit "vegetable" sounds strange for olives. They sort of shade into "condiments", although you eat more of them than you do a typical condiment. --Trovatore (talk) 02:23, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is tomorrow going to be a snow day? ~ ~ ~ ~ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.230.148.207 (talk) 02:18, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It might be, if it snows heavily where you are. And geolocate says your ISP is in Menomonee Falls, Wisconsin, so you've got a fair shot at a snow day. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:19, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Naw, I'm in Milwaukee. My ISP is always off by a couple miles. 76.230.148.207 (talk) 02:22, 9 December 2009 (UTC)))[reply]

Same general area. So it depends on which portion of the storm hits you. How much is on the ground so far, and is it still snowing? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:26, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There's no more than 3 inches (I think 7.5 cm, if you're that type) on the ground, but it's still snowing —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.230.148.207 (talk) 02:37, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You won't know until the morning. It depends on whether the road crews work continuously (and redundantly) through the night, or if they wait until it stops. They would probably do the major arteries more than once. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:44, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You can sign up for snow day email alerts at this page. Not sure if it covers your area, so your mileage may vary. Dismas|^(talk) 05:57, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I assume you've tried asking [What's the fucking weather? http://www.thefuckingweather.com/] 22:36, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

It seems 'alright', according to that. Anyway, I doubt the OP wanted to know what the weather was like in London, UK, and it was equally irrelevant to me (not being anywhere near London). --KageTora - SPQW - (影虎) (talk) 03:38, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

? That site gives you the fucking weather for anywhere you ask. Based on the OP's ISP, for example, [8]. I'm guessing that the temperature given is in Fahrenheit, or I think I'd be dead. 86.166.148.95 (talk) 13:29, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Minus two fahrenheit is rather colder than minus two celsius. Of course, as you approach 40 below, they get closer. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:17, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but I don't live there. 86.140.172.206 (talk) 19:43, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This salad dressing right here: [9] The ingredients are listed.

It doesn't seem to have mayonnaise in it, but is instead apparently made of a soybean oil base.

It has an expiration date (but then, so do many potato chips and bottles of beer), but it does not say "KEEP REFRIGERATED" or "REFRIGERATE AFTER OPENING" on the bottle.

If it was left out in the open for 2 days, would it need to be thrown out? 173.66.202.179 (talk) 03:26, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is e-mail and phone contact information on that web site which you linked to. Their answer should serve as a guide. Bus stop (talk) 03:37, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Was it left for two days with the top on and closed, or off/open. If off/open, I would be inclined to play safe and throw it out. If on and closed, consider whether or not the store where it was bought keeps it on chilled or refrigerated shelves; if not then it's likely OK. 87.81.230.195 (talk) 00:25, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not exactly, since the bottle on the uncooled shelf was sealed. Mayonnaise is stored on shelves at the store at room temperature, but must be kept refrigerated after opening. Googlemeister (talk) 15:00, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not really relevant, since (a) this product apparently does not contain mayonnaise

(whose article reads in part "There is a misconception that foods like potato salad can make a person sick if left out in the sun, due to the mayonnaise spoiling. This is false; the pH of mayonnaise prevents harmful bacteria from growing in it. Left out of refrigeration, mayonnaise will develop an unappetizing taste and smell, due to other types of bacteria and molds that can spoil it; but will not make one sick"),

and (b) is not labelled as requiring refrigeration. There is in any case often a gap between what manufacturers are constrained to say to cover their arses in case of idiocy, and what may with the application of common sense be an acceptibly low risk. 87.81.230.195 (talk) 01:02, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There are definitely things which require refrigeration after opening but not before, although these would usually say they do. Oyster sauce is one, I know from experience of things growing in it after a while (ths happened multiple times). Obviously we're talking weeks rather then days. Even something like (commercial) jam, which of course is intended as a method of preserving fruit can go moldy (again from personal experience as well as [10]) although perhaps this is related to modern methods (e.g. reduced sugar) and the like as well Nil Einne (talk) 03:42, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is wikipedia a social networking site? BigDunc 15:31, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not really, no. Usually when people say 'social networking' they mean sites where individuals go to communicate with other individuals (one-to-one or one-to-many) e.g. Facebook, MySpace etc. Wikipedia is a socially-collaborative website in that it is developed and maintained by (mostly voluntary) individuals. Or to put it more brand-like "it's the encyclopedia anybody can edit". 15:36, 9 December 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.221.133.226 (talk)

It's actually quite difficult to adequately build a "social network" on Wikipedia—it is a site designed around editing content, not connecting with others. --Mr.98 (talk) 15:40, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Our "What Wikipedia is not" policy has a section on how it's not a social networking site. AlmostReadytoFly (talk) 16:26, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That being said, there are social aspects to Wikipedia editing. It is, afterall, fundementally a collaborational project, and when you collaborate long-term with a group of people, you tend to develop a "social network" among those people, if you will. After all, I recognize and get to know people by their on-wiki personalities, and there are even things like "Wiki-meetups" and the like, where wikipedians get together; they would have not otherwise met had Wikipedia not existed. That being said, the social networking aspect of Wikipedia is supposed to be of secondary concern. Wikipedia has an ethic which holds that content holds primacy over all else. So while Wikipedia is not a social networking website it does have some aspects of social networking which go on as part of a secondary function of its role as a collaborationally-written encyclopedia. --Jayron32 17:23, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. And there is an argument that has been made (though maybe I was the only one who used to make it!) that the encyclopedia is an excuse for a community, and that it is really the community that makes the encyclopedia. Hence the reason why empty forks look so pathetic and seem to miss the point. But that being said, I wouldn't call it a social networking site. It doesn't really exist to facilitate networking at all. --Mr.98 (talk) 18:38, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ideally, it's the other way around - positive social networking facilitates the site. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:43, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The nurses at the facility where my Dad has his dialysis feel free to change his treatment from the prescription, by lowering the flow rate, without his permission (or even notifying him). A low flow rate means no "alarms" will go off, which makes things easier for the nurses, but doesn't provide for a full dialysis. I complained about this and asked if the dialysis machine can be placed so he can view the flow rate himself. (It's on wheels and could easily be turned to a 45° angle.) Their answer was "Michigan state law doesn't allow this, since the patients could fiddle with the controls". This sounds like total BS to me. So, where can I get a definitive answer as to whether this is the case or not ? Ideally, assuming it's not actually the law, I'd like to be able to get a letter from a state official stating that. StuRat (talk) 16:35, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Can you discuss this with his doctor? Or, is there an ombudsman at the dialysis facility?99.166.95.142 (talk) 16:42, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid we can't give legal advice. The hospital will have a formal complaints procedure - I suggest you go through it. --Tango (talk) 17:22, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Legal advice" would be if I asked "should I sue ?". I'm not asking that, only what the law states. That isn't any different than, say, asking which states have the death penalty. StuRat (talk) 17:35, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You asked what the law is for a specific real life situation. That is a request for legal advice. While we can look up and tell you the law we don't know if you've missed out a key detail in the story that means the standard law wouldn't apply. That is why we don't answer these kinds of questions. --Tango (talk) 20:43, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You should ask someone other than the nurses, who are liable to take offense. I'd start with whoever wrote the prescription and/or is his attending physician. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 17:45, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You should talk to the doctor immediately; the nurses have no business altering his prescription. Comet Tuttle (talk) 18:17, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And if the doctor is unresponsive, you should tell him that you will have no other choice, then, but to consult a lawyer, since the Ref Desk can't suggest that a malpractice lawsuit might be a recourse. Marco polo (talk) 20:14, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You can search teh Michigan Compiled Laws. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 23:47, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I hazard a guess that Michigan Department of Community Health might be the place to enquire; they're responsible for regulating licenced medical practitioners in the state through the Bureaus of Health Professions and Health Systems. I suggest digging around on that website and rattling their cages. Best wishes for your dad's health. --Tagishsimon (talk) 00:23, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I was wondering if it would be possible to download the English Wikipedia with all included media. I know there are database dump of the raw text. what I don't know is if there is a dump for its media counterpart. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.104.186.192 (talk) 17:16, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You may want to ask at the Wikipedia:Help desk, they may be more suited to answering a question of this nature. --Jayron32 17:17, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"witness" comes from this greek word and means___?Accdude92 (talk to me!) (sign) 17:17, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It comes from the word DYOH, and means Do Your Own Homework. --LarryMac | Talk 17:22, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Find the wiktionary website or any other dictionary site and you should be able to get most any word's origin. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:24, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The OED does not think it comes from Greek, fullstop. But really, Accdude: is the rest of the internet dead today, that you really cannot research an etymology yourself? --Tagishsimon (talk) 17:33, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's apparently been re-used by Christians as a literal translation of martyr. What that word meant to the Greeks I couldn't say. Something to do with being aware of or concerned about things seems to be the general theme. 213.122.50.56 (talk) 17:42, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Click me. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 23:47, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Are there any business networking sites or blogs like social networking wherein people who want to start a busines humbly (supplier and buyer) as both need each other to begin any business in India or abroad..any hint would be a great help. thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.122.36.6 (talk) 18:27, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

LinkedIn? --Jayron32 18:38, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Zentrada? --Ouro (blah blah) 12:54, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Last week when the temperatures in New England shattered the all-time record for hottest days, I read an article that had information about there being four times as many local hottest days on record than coldest days on record. I have seached Google and News for it but can't find it. Can you help? Thanks! Reywas92^Talk 20:39, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but I don't understand your question. Last week, I think on Thursday, many locations in New England had temperatures that exceeded the previous record high for that date. For every date, in every location, there is exactly one record high temperature and one record low temperature. Are you trying to say that the record high for a given date had been recorded in several different years, but that the record low for that date had only been recorded once? Or are you trying to say something else? Marco polo (talk) 21:05, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think the questioner is referring to how many times recently the record for hottest/coldest temperature on a given day was broken. DJ Clayworth (talk) 21:08, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would think the Urban heat island effect casts some doubt over what you can draw from an increase in record temperatures in one particular location. An increasing population (or just greater sprawling of the existing population) likely means deforestation and paving things over, which increases temperature measurements in the city. That's why there is an effort to either correct for urban temperature measurements or use rural temperature measurements when mapping temperature changes across a wider area, and since a lot of weather data is not collected in rural areas, I believe satellite measurements are preferred for measurements of global temperatures. TastyCakes (talk) 21:32, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The number of times a record is broken is a bit of a fuzzy thing. Suppose the record high for this entire week from 100 years ago was 100F. Now imagine a rising heat trend over a period of a week in which the daily highest temperature goes 98,99,100,101,102,103,104 - was the record broken four times or only once? If your answer is "4 times" then did the record get broken 24x4=95 times because we measured the temperature every hour? Was it only 4 times because it got cooler each night? In the end, there was one record-breaking phenomenon - and it could have lasted all summer and still been only one notable phenomenon. So I'm not sure this means much. SteveBaker (talk) 22:10, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On the other hand, the problems with record highs ought to be the same as the problems with record lows, so if one is breaking one far more often than the other then it is suggestive of a shift in climate. Dragons flight (talk) 22:35, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Expansion of urban heat islands wouldn't have much effect on records in New England over recent decades. The region's population is not expanding much, and what sprawl has occurred since, say, 1970, has not affected many of the region's weather stations. Either they were within an urban heat island in 1970 and still are, or they weren't then and aren't now. Marco polo (talk) 22:36, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Whoa! Sorry, I guess I didn't clarify. There was a news article about this. With the prompting of the high temperatures in New England, the article mentioned that in 2009, the daily temperature in cities in the US had like 19,000 record highs for that day, but only 4,500 record lows, or some big numbers. I am looking for that article, but I couldn't find it searching. Reywas92^Talk 02:25, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Here is one article along those lines. Marco polo (talk) 03:00, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!! That's it! Reywas92^Talk 03:47, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You know those cassette-tapes that had a headphone-cable sticking out of them that you put in your car-stereo and it made you tape-deck work so you could play your portable CD player through it? They were popular in the 90s - anyways...how did they work? 22:33, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Cassette tape adaptor --Mr.98 (talk) 23:13, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I still have one and it works perfectly. And as the article notes, you can play an iPod through it also. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:42, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You can still buy them - my son bought one a few months ago. They work by magnetism. Recall that the head in the tape deck picks up fluctuating magnetic levels as the tape moves past the head - so if you take an electromagnet - place it right next to the tape head and make the magnetic field vary with the voltage coming from the MP3 player - then the tape deck can't tell that there isn't any tape moving past. Interestingly, the electromagnet in my son's machine is just another tape head - driven "backwards". The quality isn't great - but since his car doesn't have a CD player or an audio input jack - hijacking the tape input is the only option. SteveBaker (talk) 00:24, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's not the only option. There also exist small FM transmitters that are designed to hook up to mp3 players. You just have to set your radio to the required station and you've got yourself a car mp3 player. I've never used one, but have a friend who does. We use the mp3-to-tape method, but the weird thing is that the fake cassette actually has the little toothed spools in it and you can hear them rattling around in there. I wonder if the mechanism will still work if I crack the cassette and take them out. May have to be some OR tonight! Matt Deres (talk) 18:06, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The cassette tape adaptor article explains that the spindle is part of a system that tricks the tape player into thinking there's a tape moving in the casette. Modern tape players monitor the tape motion to know if they need to switch sides. You might try this test first: Take the spindles and tape out of a normal cassette tape and insert the empty cassette into your player and see what happens. --Bavi H (talk) 01:58, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]