The "unststainable" comment was in general, not neccesarily aimed directly at this diet. For this diet in particular, basically, whenever I see something that references "toxins" I dismiss it as quackery - especially if it talks about things like a "toxic bowel" or "adjusting the intestinal flora" (H. Pylori is mainly known for causing ulcers in the stomach, not intestine, though). But hey, if it's working for you, that's great. I don't think there's a catch-all for everyone, though, and I'd quite honestly like to hear from someone who's stuck with that diet for 10-20 years. It's good that you're treating it like a lifetime choice, though. Props for that.:)
I'm particularly taking issue with the idea of removing all starchy substances from the diet. All grains, corn, and potatoes are bad? That sounds a whole lot like a gimmick and not much like real science. Pushing "more natural" foods sounds pretty gimmicky as well. Stricknine is natural. Cyanide occurs naturally. Death is natural. Simly being "natural" doesn't make something a good idea for health.:) Science is often a good thing. Also, the places where grains are used "in excess" are also often places where people in general lead more sedentary lives, and tend to eat more fatty foods, as well as having a bazillion other factors outside of eating bread regularly. I'm inclined to believe that eating lots of fat and sitting on a couch after a hard day at work sitting in a chair might be the bigger reason for high rates of obesity, personally.:)
As far as Dr. consultation goes, great. But were any of those Doctors also dieticians? Doctors, contrary to popular belief, aren't gods. They don't know everything. Even general practitioners only generally learn about how the systems work and interact. In general, the MD's training doesn't include much food science, if any. That's a whole separate degree path. So yeah, I'll grant points for at least asking *someone* who's apt to know *something*, and I'm not implying that they're wrong, but it still might be a good idea to run your diet by someone who's an actual dietician unaffiliated with the program in question (my grandmother was a registered dietician and my wife's an accredited clinical lab scientist, so perhaps I'm just biased against MDs). You were right about the "everything in moderation" thing, and it'd be a good thing to make sure that you're compensating for what you're losing by [almost] totally removing complex carbohydrates from the diet. My vegitarean wife, for example, needs to ensure that she's taking a B vitamin supplement and getting protein from things like beans and broccoli, due to choosing a diet without meat. I'm lazy, so I should really take a vitamin or eat some cheerios to compensate for my atrocious diet.:) Either way, the body needs a few things to make it go, so do make sure that you're getting *all* of those things.
Corn farmers aren't getting rich, or even close to it. The price for a bushel of corn is about the same as it was in the 60's (though yields are a little improved, and technologies are generally better). The people getting rich are the corn *processors* - groups like ADM, etc. So, as is typically the case, the corporations get to make the laws and the profits, and the people get crapped on.
BTW, I think that the presence of HFCS in almost everything would indicate that it's not really failing. It's evil, but not failing.:)
Any diet that suggests giving up a whole section of foods - like saying to "avoid grains" - is a bad idea. Period. If it's temporary for a medical or immediate weight loss gain, fine, but doing things like that which aren't sustainable is just bad. Also, saying that people who eat grains are unhealthy is just ignorant (not neccesarily the same thign as "stupid"). Refined sugars are one thing, but lumping all grains in there. Hmph. There are places where people live almost exclusively *on* grains or have grain as a major part of their diet (I guess there's no rice on this diet, either?), and have for centuries. These places aren't full of fat, unhealthy people...
Yes. It's the liberals ruining both the country and Slashdot. Or conservatives. Or some other political group that's your favorite political group's arch enemy (fuckin' libertarians letting off-topic posts into Slashdot!). It couldn't be that people just don't give a damn about Coke and coffee, and feel that the space is better used to discuss anything and everything else with even the most tenuous relationship to the original topic.
Did they taste different? I don't recall there being a significant difference - though I'm a Coke fan and never really drank regular Pepsi. The Clear Pepsi was perpetually on sale, so I did drink it fairly often, though.:)
That's a great idea, until they throw it away and send you a letter (using your tax dollars to pay for postage) a month later noting that the form was illegible, so you'll have to fill it out again and resubmit. Remember, public servants rarely serve the public.
That's not a theory, it's indisputable fact. Well, I suppose someone could disagree, therefore disputing it, but that doesn't matter because they'd be wrong.
Does your NIC not have a MAC? Or maybe you were referring to Mac, which is short for Macintosh, as opposed to MAC, which is an abbrev. for Media Access Control...
Sorry, nothing useful to contribute other than a presumption that no one uses serial consoles anymore.
I think the problem is just when there's just nothing attractive on your property. Just walk around your house naked all the time. Then you'll either find that shortcutters stay away, or you can file suit against them.:)
I dunno, maybe the workstation needs 16 displays and doesn't have any free expansion slots, nor does it have on-board networking. A network adapter was just the first non-keyboard thing that popped into my head. Perhaps it would've been better to use "hardware dongle to enable AutoCAD" or something along those lines. Either way, just disabling USB wouldn't really be a valid option in lots of situations.
The buzzcut guy, OTOH, perhaps in combination with a moat... I like that suggestion. Buzzcut would probably also reduce (or increase, depending on his mood) the amount of porn browsing at work.:)
Cool. Knowing that it helped one person makes the effort totally worthwhile. Thank *you*!
Maybe I'll go ahead and write that chage, then. I'm pretty sure it was in there when I wrote what I wrote, but like I said, I haven't really messed with LDAP for a while (and nss_ldap + pam_ldap took care of most of the orignal reason anyway). Either way, "fix LDAP stuff" is now on my to-do list.:)
Re:Bash build a program now in 10 easy seconds
on
Build a Program Now
·
· Score: 1
It's not evil in the eyes of the Chinese government, which is what matters when one does business with the Chinese government. It's not censored outside of China, and darn near everything else *is* censored in China. That censorship would include something along the lines of "iptables --dest *.google.com -j DROP" if they didn't comply with Chinese rules, so they do what they can for the Chinese residents by complying with the rules. I'm glad the Chinese can find my software which is indexed by Google, so I'm calling this "not evil".
Similarly, I don't think it's really necesary for the US to force its views on the rest of the world outside of China, either...
Isn't Jennifer Anniston suing / considering suing some photographer for getting a topless photo of her from like a mile away? I'd imagine that the scumbag paparazzi's camera could get detail through a business window just as easily. I wonder if information gathered that way is considered just as acceptable as photos taken of people in public places?
What you really mean is that "most" large metropolitan areas have some kind of testing required, wheras "rural" areas in many states do not have that crap to deal with. Furthermore, if you get pulled over, you get a warning and maybe a fine - no one goes to federal high-security prison for failing to obtain emissions certification.
Besides, somehow I think the tracker will get poor reception in my cars. The wiring may also suffer from some rather poor connections which, darn it, just keep coming loose. Oops. Must've been a poor ground...
Amusing that you mention that. It snowed a lot here last Thursday, and I had to drive 40-45 MPH on the way to work, and on the way home, due to the road conditions. Normally I run about 60-70 on that road. It took over twice the amount of gas for me to get there. That's because the engine was running below its optimum powerband, and therefore wasn't as efficient as it would have been at a higher speed. It took quite a bit more fuel to propel the car the same distance, though it was probably using a little less fuel per unit time.
Anyway, emissions don't have much to do with mileage. A flex-fuel vehicle running on ethanol will have fewer harmful emissions than the same vehicle running on gas, but it'll also get lower mileage. An old car without a cat could get better mileage than a new one with a cat, but there might be more emissions from the carb'd car (or there might be less). Measuring fuel consumption would require 1) a dyno and 2) a way to interrupt the fuel system to insert a flow rate measuring device. The dyno would need recalibrated, and the fuel interrupt would have to be set up by a qualified mechanic - and I can tell you that I darned sure don't want some jackass mechanic who's "done this a million times, sure" screwing around with *my* fuel system. It would get rather expensive to install devices like this at every DMV and to pay more employees / train them - probably requiring an increase in the gas tax to pay for it.:)
Re:Bash build a program now in 10 easy seconds
on
Build a Program Now
·
· Score: 1
I'm not sure that program would work. You might want to thrown an "escape" in there, probably just before the ZZ. Then maybe it'd work.:)
I didn't say it was handling well or even that I thought it would stay on the road if I went around a corner. I just needed to go straight. Adding a wing for downforce would just increase drag and slow things down. That's an acceptable tradeoff when you're 1) trying to go around a track where you will want to turn eventually or 2) trying to accelerate to maximum speed over the course of 1/4 mile with something putting out more than 1000 HP. Also, worrying about things like "safety" might lead one to do aero stuff. For a dumb kid driving down a really long, straight road, none of those apply.
If the rear tires were slipping, I'd like to think that I'm a good enough driver to notice that. They weren't perceptibly sliding, though it was kinda tough to keep going straight (the tailgate blew open somewhere around 120-ish). There was slippage in the clutch, I'm sure. That 327 was easily putting out 475+ HP, though. Regarding the 'Vette comparison, the Z06 tops out at 198 MPH. That's just a tad over 6000 RPMs in 5th gear with its 26.7" tires, and the jump to the next gear drops the engine too far out of its power band for it to overcome the drag (it would drop down to 4800 RPMs - 1000 RPMs below the torque peak). So, the Corvette is really drag limited by its drivetrain, though its top speed is RPM limited. If there was a closer split between 5th (.71:1) and 6th (.57:1), it could probably go faster. That 'Vette is bad-ass.
For comparison, my '96 caprice cop car is drag limited to 145MPH with the stock 3.08:1 gears, but can get up to the 160 range by just changing to a 3.42:1 rear. This is in a 5700 pound car with a mere 260HP engine, and aerodynamics which aren't really a whole lot better than my El Camino (which I'd argue to be the most aero Elky design over the years). So, it's not just about horespower, and the downforce stuff is there on supercars for control - not speed.
All of that said, I'm estimating the speed to between 180 and 190, but I usually just say "190" since that sounds better and is plausible. All I can say for certain is that the 100MPH speedo was buried before I even got into third gear, that the tach was accurate, the gear ratios are accurate, and that I was going a *whole* lot faster than the Mitsubish GT3000 (published top speed: 155 MPH) which felt like it needed to pick a race with the wrong guy. I found out later it was an off-duty cop driving that car, and that he had it wide open trying to catch up to me. Whoops.:) Eh, his car probably made it home. Mine needed a new engine. That's a fair price to pay for spanking some cop in a sports car.:)
Slashdot Mirror
The "unststainable" comment was in general, not neccesarily aimed directly at this diet. For this diet in particular, basically, whenever I see something that references "toxins" I dismiss it as quackery - especially if it talks about things like a "toxic bowel" or "adjusting the intestinal flora" (H. Pylori is mainly known for causing ulcers in the stomach, not intestine, though). But hey, if it's working for you, that's great. I don't think there's a catch-all for everyone, though, and I'd quite honestly like to hear from someone who's stuck with that diet for 10-20 years. It's good that you're treating it like a lifetime choice, though. Props for that. :)
:) Science is often a good thing. Also, the places where grains are used "in excess" are also often places where people in general lead more sedentary lives, and tend to eat more fatty foods, as well as having a bazillion other factors outside of eating bread regularly. I'm inclined to believe that eating lots of fat and sitting on a couch after a hard day at work sitting in a chair might be the bigger reason for high rates of obesity, personally. :)
:) Either way, the body needs a few things to make it go, so do make sure that you're getting *all* of those things.
I'm particularly taking issue with the idea of removing all starchy substances from the diet. All grains, corn, and potatoes are bad? That sounds a whole lot like a gimmick and not much like real science. Pushing "more natural" foods sounds pretty gimmicky as well. Stricknine is natural. Cyanide occurs naturally. Death is natural. Simly being "natural" doesn't make something a good idea for health.
As far as Dr. consultation goes, great. But were any of those Doctors also dieticians? Doctors, contrary to popular belief, aren't gods. They don't know everything. Even general practitioners only generally learn about how the systems work and interact. In general, the MD's training doesn't include much food science, if any. That's a whole separate degree path. So yeah, I'll grant points for at least asking *someone* who's apt to know *something*, and I'm not implying that they're wrong, but it still might be a good idea to run your diet by someone who's an actual dietician unaffiliated with the program in question (my grandmother was a registered dietician and my wife's an accredited clinical lab scientist, so perhaps I'm just biased against MDs). You were right about the "everything in moderation" thing, and it'd be a good thing to make sure that you're compensating for what you're losing by [almost] totally removing complex carbohydrates from the diet. My vegitarean wife, for example, needs to ensure that she's taking a B vitamin supplement and getting protein from things like beans and broccoli, due to choosing a diet without meat. I'm lazy, so I should really take a vitamin or eat some cheerios to compensate for my atrocious diet.
Corn farmers aren't getting rich, or even close to it. The price for a bushel of corn is about the same as it was in the 60's (though yields are a little improved, and technologies are generally better). The people getting rich are the corn *processors* - groups like ADM, etc. So, as is typically the case, the corporations get to make the laws and the profits, and the people get crapped on.
:)
BTW, I think that the presence of HFCS in almost everything would indicate that it's not really failing. It's evil, but not failing.
Any diet that suggests giving up a whole section of foods - like saying to "avoid grains" - is a bad idea. Period. If it's temporary for a medical or immediate weight loss gain, fine, but doing things like that which aren't sustainable is just bad. Also, saying that people who eat grains are unhealthy is just ignorant (not neccesarily the same thign as "stupid"). Refined sugars are one thing, but lumping all grains in there. Hmph. There are places where people live almost exclusively *on* grains or have grain as a major part of their diet (I guess there's no rice on this diet, either?), and have for centuries. These places aren't full of fat, unhealthy people...
Yes. It's the liberals ruining both the country and Slashdot. Or conservatives. Or some other political group that's your favorite political group's arch enemy (fuckin' libertarians letting off-topic posts into Slashdot!). It couldn't be that people just don't give a damn about Coke and coffee, and feel that the space is better used to discuss anything and everything else with even the most tenuous relationship to the original topic.
Did they taste different? I don't recall there being a significant difference - though I'm a Coke fan and never really drank regular Pepsi. The Clear Pepsi was perpetually on sale, so I did drink it fairly often, though. :)
That's a great idea, until they throw it away and send you a letter (using your tax dollars to pay for postage) a month later noting that the form was illegible, so you'll have to fill it out again and resubmit. Remember, public servants rarely serve the public.
That's not a theory, it's indisputable fact. Well, I suppose someone could disagree, therefore disputing it, but that doesn't matter because they'd be wrong.
I spent all my money on Royal Purple automotive lubricants - so everything else has to be as cheap as possible. :)
Spend another $20 next time and get a good case. Whitebox doesn't mean "buy the absolute chapest shit possible"...
So tape 6 of them together. I'll bet a roll of duct tape *and* 6 X10 cameras would be enough less than $5K that they could be considered disposable. :)
Does your NIC not have a MAC? Or maybe you were referring to Mac, which is short for Macintosh, as opposed to MAC, which is an abbrev. for Media Access Control...
Sorry, nothing useful to contribute other than a presumption that no one uses serial consoles anymore.
Why would you want to see the whole film? It's *tiny* in that stupid letterbox format! :)
Two years later, I'm still irrirtated about receiving a fullscreen version of a movie for Christmas - kinda like that Onion article...
I think the problem is just when there's just nothing attractive on your property. Just walk around your house naked all the time. Then you'll either find that shortcutters stay away, or you can file suit against them. :)
I dunno, maybe the workstation needs 16 displays and doesn't have any free expansion slots, nor does it have on-board networking. A network adapter was just the first non-keyboard thing that popped into my head. Perhaps it would've been better to use "hardware dongle to enable AutoCAD" or something along those lines. Either way, just disabling USB wouldn't really be a valid option in lots of situations.
:)
The buzzcut guy, OTOH, perhaps in combination with a moat... I like that suggestion. Buzzcut would probably also reduce (or increase, depending on his mood) the amount of porn browsing at work.
Should they be a Republic, like the USA, or a Democracy, like the USA tries to force on everyone else? :)
That may adversely affect the USB keyboard, mouse, and network adapter...
Cool. Knowing that it helped one person makes the effort totally worthwhile. Thank *you*!
:)
Maybe I'll go ahead and write that chage, then. I'm pretty sure it was in there when I wrote what I wrote, but like I said, I haven't really messed with LDAP for a while (and nss_ldap + pam_ldap took care of most of the orignal reason anyway). Either way, "fix LDAP stuff" is now on my to-do list.
You put <> around it instead of <>, didn't you? :)
It's not evil in the eyes of the Chinese government, which is what matters when one does business with the Chinese government. It's not censored outside of China, and darn near everything else *is* censored in China. That censorship would include something along the lines of "iptables --dest *.google.com -j DROP" if they didn't comply with Chinese rules, so they do what they can for the Chinese residents by complying with the rules. I'm glad the Chinese can find my software which is indexed by Google, so I'm calling this "not evil".
Similarly, I don't think it's really necesary for the US to force its views on the rest of the world outside of China, either...
Isn't Jennifer Anniston suing / considering suing some photographer for getting a topless photo of her from like a mile away? I'd imagine that the scumbag paparazzi's camera could get detail through a business window just as easily. I wonder if information gathered that way is considered just as acceptable as photos taken of people in public places?
What BIOS lets you stop "new USB" from working?
What you really mean is that "most" large metropolitan areas have some kind of testing required, wheras "rural" areas in many states do not have that crap to deal with. Furthermore, if you get pulled over, you get a warning and maybe a fine - no one goes to federal high-security prison for failing to obtain emissions certification.
Besides, somehow I think the tracker will get poor reception in my cars. The wiring may also suffer from some rather poor connections which, darn it, just keep coming loose. Oops. Must've been a poor ground...
Amusing that you mention that. It snowed a lot here last Thursday, and I had to drive 40-45 MPH on the way to work, and on the way home, due to the road conditions. Normally I run about 60-70 on that road. It took over twice the amount of gas for me to get there. That's because the engine was running below its optimum powerband, and therefore wasn't as efficient as it would have been at a higher speed. It took quite a bit more fuel to propel the car the same distance, though it was probably using a little less fuel per unit time.
:)
Anyway, emissions don't have much to do with mileage. A flex-fuel vehicle running on ethanol will have fewer harmful emissions than the same vehicle running on gas, but it'll also get lower mileage. An old car without a cat could get better mileage than a new one with a cat, but there might be more emissions from the carb'd car (or there might be less). Measuring fuel consumption would require 1) a dyno and 2) a way to interrupt the fuel system to insert a flow rate measuring device. The dyno would need recalibrated, and the fuel interrupt would have to be set up by a qualified mechanic - and I can tell you that I darned sure don't want some jackass mechanic who's "done this a million times, sure" screwing around with *my* fuel system. It would get rather expensive to install devices like this at every DMV and to pay more employees / train them - probably requiring an increase in the gas tax to pay for it.
I'm not sure that program would work. You might want to thrown an "escape" in there, probably just before the ZZ. Then maybe it'd work. :)
I didn't say it was handling well or even that I thought it would stay on the road if I went around a corner. I just needed to go straight. Adding a wing for downforce would just increase drag and slow things down. That's an acceptable tradeoff when you're 1) trying to go around a track where you will want to turn eventually or 2) trying to accelerate to maximum speed over the course of 1/4 mile with something putting out more than 1000 HP. Also, worrying about things like "safety" might lead one to do aero stuff. For a dumb kid driving down a really long, straight road, none of those apply.
:) Eh, his car probably made it home. Mine needed a new engine. That's a fair price to pay for spanking some cop in a sports car. :)
If the rear tires were slipping, I'd like to think that I'm a good enough driver to notice that. They weren't perceptibly sliding, though it was kinda tough to keep going straight (the tailgate blew open somewhere around 120-ish). There was slippage in the clutch, I'm sure. That 327 was easily putting out 475+ HP, though. Regarding the 'Vette comparison, the Z06 tops out at 198 MPH. That's just a tad over 6000 RPMs in 5th gear with its 26.7" tires, and the jump to the next gear drops the engine too far out of its power band for it to overcome the drag (it would drop down to 4800 RPMs - 1000 RPMs below the torque peak). So, the Corvette is really drag limited by its drivetrain, though its top speed is RPM limited. If there was a closer split between 5th (.71:1) and 6th (.57:1), it could probably go faster. That 'Vette is bad-ass.
For comparison, my '96 caprice cop car is drag limited to 145MPH with the stock 3.08:1 gears, but can get up to the 160 range by just changing to a 3.42:1 rear. This is in a 5700 pound car with a mere 260HP engine, and aerodynamics which aren't really a whole lot better than my El Camino (which I'd argue to be the most aero Elky design over the years). So, it's not just about horespower, and the downforce stuff is there on supercars for control - not speed.
All of that said, I'm estimating the speed to between 180 and 190, but I usually just say "190" since that sounds better and is plausible. All I can say for certain is that the 100MPH speedo was buried before I even got into third gear, that the tach was accurate, the gear ratios are accurate, and that I was going a *whole* lot faster than the Mitsubish GT3000 (published top speed: 155 MPH) which felt like it needed to pick a race with the wrong guy. I found out later it was an off-duty cop driving that car, and that he had it wide open trying to catch up to me. Whoops.