Transparent : tall invisible bars are aesthetically acceptable.
Fragile : make it seem easy and simple but fragile in a way that once broken it becomes hard to climb. If you break something and hurt yourself few people will blame the inanimate object.
Sticky: as soon as you touch it, it secretes superglue. The guards come with an innocuous solvent.
Hidden : fill the moat with a "non-Newtonian" dirt colored fluid. Doesn't look like a moat, but people do fall inside and it's hard to move fast through it.
The cat is out of the bag. Crypto and its application is an academic subject now, with plenty of companies and open-source projects using the fruit of the work. That is to say, for another ten-fifteen years or so. Then, quantum will start taking it all apart. The amateurs will not have the resources to follow there.
So, basically, the cat is either out of the bag, or dead, and we won't know for another ten-fifteen years, time at which the cat wave collapses.
Snooping agencies will fight tooth and nail to keep their snooping powers
The problem with fighting tooth and nail is that it's strategically stupid to fight directly against a larger and stronger army.
The privacy arms race benefits the people, only a false feeling of safety and anonymity stops the people from making it practically impossible (or impossibly impractical) to spy on the general population.
A front attack, however strong it may be, will fail.
Some of us are accusing the agencies of being intrusive, but this is a different problem. This is about having been intrusive in a strategically unintelligent way.
Someone should make a query that extracts the Slashdot commentaries that have predicted this exact situation for a decade.
The prediction goes like this : "If you keep doing stupid shit like that, people will start encrypting their computers and communications to protect themselves from your unimportant shit and this will help the very few people who encrypt their computers and communications to hide serious crimes."
The more you turn everyone into a criminal, the harder it will be to find the actual criminals.
It's time to decriminalize the population, so people become once again able to distinguish between the guilty and the innocent.
Experiment result : "A squirrel fell on the azidoazide azide magnetic container, leveling the lab and leaving a 23 feet deep crater where the Dean's office used to be."
If you point your goggles to a spot and see a lion eating a gazelle, finding afterwards that your goggles had a dent won't make you doubt of the existence of that lion.
Or, in other words, short circuits don't conjure results that coincide with decades of theory.
In case you are interested, I'll summarize for you.
A - Calculate daily kcal expenditure [via a formula, for example]. B - Count how much you must eat :
B1 - ~1.5g proteins/day * 4kcal per gram of protein.
B2 - ~1g of fat/day * 9kcal per gram of fat C - Decide how much to eat. e.g. : daily expenditure - 500 to lose weight at 500g/week speed. D - Calculate carbs by dividing remaining daily kcals/4 E - Eat those grams of protein, fat and carbs every day.
Everything else is either details for pro athletes or voodoo shenanigans.
Like I stated above, having an office job and not exercising, one would only need ~1300 calories for equilibrium.
Let's see: 1300 = 370 + (21.6 x LBM) Where LBM = [total weight (kg) x (100 - bodyfat %)]/100
With an average BF% of about 25%, this gets us : (1300 -370) / 21.6 = total weight (kg) x 0.75
So, you're talking about the "average" 57kg American?
And, even if that was true, a person that small would need 57~85g of protein and ~57g fat per day, which is 741 kcal per day to which that person could perfectly well add 300 kcal of carbs, some vitamins and minerals.
Basic Terminology 1/ BMR (Basal Metabolic Rate): The amount of calories you need to consume to maintain if you were comatose (base level). 2/ NEAT (Non-Exercise Associated Thermogenesis): The calorie of daily activity that is NOT exercise (eg: washing, walking, talking, shopping, working). ie: INCIDENTAL EXERCISE! It is something that everyone has a good amount of control over. 3/ EAT (Exercise Associated Thermogenesis): The calorie requirements associated with planned exercise. Unless someone is doing a whole heap of exercise (eg: two or more hrs training a day) it usually doesn't add a stack of calories to your requirements (30 minutes of 'elliptical training' isn't going to burn 6000 cals) 4/ TEF (Thermic effect of feeding): The calorie expenditure associated with eating. This is NOT dependent on MEAL FREQUENCY. It is a % of TOTAL CALORIES CONSUMED (and 15% of 3 x 600 cal meals is the same as 15% of 6 x 300 cal meals). It varies according to MACRONUTRIENT and FIBER content. For most mixed diets, it is something around 15%. Protein is higher (up to 25%), carbs are variable (between 5-25%), and fats are low (usually less than 5%). So more protein, more carbs, and more fiber = HIGHER TEF. More FAT = LOWER TEF. 5/ TEE (Total Energy Expenditure): The total calories you require. It = sum of the above (BMR + NEAT + EAT + TEF). To make things simple, NEAT + EAT + TEF is often just calculated through a daily ACTIVITY FACTOR.
How much do I Need? A multitude of things impact MAINTENANCE calorie needs. - Age & sex (males generally need > females) - Total weight & lean mass (more lean mass = more needed) - Physiological status (eg: sick or injured, pregnant, growth') - Hormones - Exercise level (more activity = more needed) - Daily activity level (more activity = more needed) - Diet (that is - macronutrient intake)
In order to calculate your requirements the most accurate measure is Calorimetry [the measure of 'chemical reactions' in your body & the heat produced by these reactions], either directly (via a calorimeter where the heat you produce is measured) or indirectly (eg: HOOD studies where they monitor how much oxygen you use/ carbon dioxide and nitrogen you excrete over a given time). But these are completely impractical for most people & we rely on pre-set formula to calculate our needs.
Estimating Requirements The simplest method uses a standard 'calories per unit weight (usually kgs)'. They calculate a TOTAL CAL REQUIREMENT (TEE). That means you DO NOT need to x by an ACTIVITY FACTOR. They are: - 26 to 30 kcals/kg/day for normal, healthy individuals with sedentary lifestyles doing little physical activity [12.0-14 kcal/pound] - 31 to 37 kcal/kg/day for those involved in light to moderate activity 3-5 x a week with moderately active lifestyles [14-16 kcal/ pound] - 38 to 40 kcals/kg/day for those involved in vigorous activity and highly active jobs [16-18 kcal/ pound]. For those involved in HEAVY training (eg: athletes) - the demand is greater: - 41 to 50 kcals/kg/day for those involved in moderate to heavy training (for example: 15-20 hrs/ week training) [18.5-22 kcal/ pound] - 50 or above kcals/kg/day for those involved in heavy to extreme training [> 22 kcal/ pound]
THEN - There are also other formula which calculate BMR. For these you then ADD AN ACTIVITY FACTOR TO REACH TEE. These are: 1/ Harris-Benedict formula: Very inaccurate & derived from studies on LEAN, YOUNG, ACTIVE males in 1919. Notorious for OVERESTIMATING requirements, especially in the overweight. DON'T USE IT! MEN: BMR = 66 + [13.7 x weight (kg)] + [5 x height (cm)] - [6.76 x age (years)] WOMEN: BMR = 655 + [9.6 x weight (kg)] + [1.8 x height (cm)] - [4.7 x age (years)]
2/Mifflin-St Jeor: Developed in the 1990s and more realistic in todays settings. Still doesn't cons
"Captain Johnson! Where the fuck are the two tons of plutonium you left the base with!" *shrugs* "No idea." "WHAT!" "NO IDEA. SIR!" "Ok, that's better. Try to be more careful with the next plutonium truck. Shit ain't growing on trees, you know?"
Slashdot Mirror
This arms race will go for the users. The reason being that there's too much money in play to allow the opposite.
Whatever has to be done will be done. If it becomes such a problem that the USA has to invent a "war on hacker" and start "bombing by IP", it will.
But we're talking a long, long time from now. Like many, many... weeks.
Transparent : tall invisible bars are aesthetically acceptable.
Fragile : make it seem easy and simple but fragile in a way that once broken it becomes hard to climb. If you break something and hurt yourself few people will blame the inanimate object.
Sticky: as soon as you touch it, it secretes superglue. The guards come with an innocuous solvent.
Hidden : fill the moat with a "non-Newtonian" dirt colored fluid. Doesn't look like a moat, but people do fall inside and it's hard to move fast through it.
You forgot the quotes over "fun".
The cat is out of the bag. Crypto and its application is an academic subject now, with plenty of companies and open-source projects using the fruit of the work. That is to say, for another ten-fifteen years or so. Then, quantum will start taking it all apart. The amateurs will not have the resources to follow there.
So, basically, the cat is either out of the bag, or dead, and we won't know for another ten-fifteen years, time at which the cat wave collapses.
Snooping agencies will fight tooth and nail to keep their snooping powers
The problem with fighting tooth and nail is that it's strategically stupid to fight directly against a larger and stronger army.
The privacy arms race benefits the people, only a false feeling of safety and anonymity stops the people from making it practically impossible (or impossibly impractical) to spy on the general population.
A front attack, however strong it may be, will fail.
Some of us are accusing the agencies of being intrusive, but this is a different problem. This is about having been intrusive in a strategically unintelligent way.
Someone should make a query that extracts the Slashdot commentaries that have predicted this exact situation for a decade.
The prediction goes like this : "If you keep doing stupid shit like that, people will start encrypting their computers and communications to protect themselves from your unimportant shit and this will help the very few people who encrypt their computers and communications to hide serious crimes."
The more you turn everyone into a criminal, the harder it will be to find the actual criminals.
It's time to decriminalize the population, so people become once again able to distinguish between the guilty and the innocent.
Humans can do it better. It's a fact proven by a few thousand years of doing it better and so much faster.
I've lost too much faith in average intelligence to spend time in trying futilely to further explain to you why you're an imbecile.
Ok, that's enough slashdot for today. I'm tired of this shit.
Experiment result : "A squirrel fell on the azidoazide azide magnetic container, leveling the lab and leaving a 23 feet deep crater where the Dean's office used to be."
Conclusion : "Higgs Boson!"
So, in essence, you become the cheapest possible whore.
I don't think works as you think it does.
If you point your goggles to a spot and see a lion eating a gazelle, finding afterwards that your goggles had a dent won't make you doubt of the existence of that lion.
Or, in other words, short circuits don't conjure results that coincide with decades of theory.
If you don't have a crowbar on reach at all moments, you're gambling with your own life.
In case you are interested, I'll summarize for you.
A - Calculate daily kcal expenditure [via a formula, for example].
B - Count how much you must eat :
B1 - ~1.5g proteins/day * 4kcal per gram of protein.
B2 - ~1g of fat/day * 9kcal per gram of fat
C - Decide how much to eat. e.g. : daily expenditure - 500 to lose weight at 500g/week speed.
D - Calculate carbs by dividing remaining daily kcals/4
E - Eat those grams of protein, fat and carbs every day.
Everything else is either details for pro athletes or voodoo shenanigans.
It usually isn't so bad, unless you lower the filters to read ACs.
Like I stated above, having an office job and not exercising, one would only need ~1300 calories for equilibrium.
Let's see:
1300 = 370 + (21.6 x LBM) Where LBM = [total weight (kg) x (100 - bodyfat %)]/100
With an average BF% of about 25%, this gets us :
(1300 -370) / 21.6 = total weight (kg) x 0.75
So, you're talking about the "average" 57kg American?
And, even if that was true, a person that small would need 57~85g of protein and ~57g fat per day, which is 741 kcal per day to which that person could perfectly well add 300 kcal of carbs, some vitamins and minerals.
Don't eat anything that wasn't alive.
For instance, there is not a creature called a "Dorito"
Because your body can make more fat with 200kcal of Doritos than with 200kcal of chicken. By the powers of fat summoning from Dorito dimension.
"How fricking complicated is it to eat less than you burn?"
Followed by a huge, complicated, wall of text.
I suppose it's THAT complicated!
You do know this is Slashdot, right?
If ten minutes of reading, or simple formula, scare you, ... Well, I guess, yeah, eliminate all sugar and eat salt as you crave it. Good luck.
How fricking complicated is it to eat less than you burn?
Calories and Macros
Basic Terminology
1/ BMR (Basal Metabolic Rate): The amount of calories you need to consume to maintain if you were comatose (base level).
2/ NEAT (Non-Exercise Associated Thermogenesis): The calorie of daily activity that is NOT exercise (eg: washing, walking, talking, shopping, working). ie: INCIDENTAL EXERCISE! It is something that everyone has a good amount of control over.
3/ EAT (Exercise Associated Thermogenesis): The calorie requirements associated with planned exercise. Unless someone is doing a whole heap of exercise (eg: two or more hrs training a day) it usually doesn't add a stack of calories to your requirements (30 minutes of 'elliptical training' isn't going to burn 6000 cals)
4/ TEF (Thermic effect of feeding): The calorie expenditure associated with eating. This is NOT dependent on MEAL FREQUENCY. It is a % of TOTAL CALORIES CONSUMED (and 15% of 3 x 600 cal meals is the same as 15% of 6 x 300 cal meals). It varies according to MACRONUTRIENT and FIBER content. For most mixed diets, it is something around 15%. Protein is higher (up to 25%), carbs are variable (between 5-25%), and fats are low (usually less than 5%). So more protein, more carbs, and more fiber = HIGHER TEF. More FAT = LOWER TEF.
5/ TEE (Total Energy Expenditure): The total calories you require. It = sum of the above (BMR + NEAT + EAT + TEF).
To make things simple, NEAT + EAT + TEF is often just calculated through a daily ACTIVITY FACTOR.
How much do I Need?
A multitude of things impact MAINTENANCE calorie needs.
- Age & sex (males generally need > females)
- Total weight & lean mass (more lean mass = more needed)
- Physiological status (eg: sick or injured, pregnant, growth')
- Hormones
- Exercise level (more activity = more needed)
- Daily activity level (more activity = more needed)
- Diet (that is - macronutrient intake)
In order to calculate your requirements the most accurate measure is Calorimetry [the measure of 'chemical reactions' in your body & the heat produced by these reactions], either directly (via a calorimeter where the heat you produce is measured) or indirectly (eg: HOOD studies where they monitor how much oxygen you use/ carbon dioxide and nitrogen you excrete over a given time). But these are completely impractical for most people & we rely on pre-set formula to calculate our needs.
Estimating Requirements
The simplest method uses a standard 'calories per unit weight (usually kgs)'. They calculate a TOTAL CAL REQUIREMENT (TEE). That means you DO NOT need to x by an ACTIVITY FACTOR. They are:
- 26 to 30 kcals/kg/day for normal, healthy individuals with sedentary lifestyles doing little physical activity [12.0-14 kcal/pound]
- 31 to 37 kcal/kg/day for those involved in light to moderate activity 3-5 x a week with moderately active lifestyles [14-16 kcal/ pound]
- 38 to 40 kcals/kg/day for those involved in vigorous activity and highly active jobs [16-18 kcal/ pound].
For those involved in HEAVY training (eg: athletes) - the demand is greater:
- 41 to 50 kcals/kg/day for those involved in moderate to heavy training (for example: 15-20 hrs/ week training) [18.5-22 kcal/ pound]
- 50 or above kcals/kg/day for those involved in heavy to extreme training [> 22 kcal/ pound]
THEN - There are also other formula which calculate BMR. For these you then ADD AN ACTIVITY FACTOR TO REACH TEE. These are:
1/ Harris-Benedict formula: Very inaccurate & derived from studies on LEAN, YOUNG, ACTIVE males in 1919. Notorious for OVERESTIMATING requirements, especially in the overweight. DON'T USE IT!
MEN: BMR = 66 + [13.7 x weight (kg)] + [5 x height (cm)] - [6.76 x age (years)]
WOMEN: BMR = 655 + [9.6 x weight (kg)] + [1.8 x height (cm)] - [4.7 x age (years)]
2/Mifflin-St Jeor: Developed in the 1990s and more realistic in todays settings. Still doesn't cons
The time it took them to increase the heat and transmit a 1 varied between three and 20 minute
So, somewhere between Comcast's Standard and High Speed plans.
Well. At least they tried.
I guess it's time to go back to the previous method, reading of auras.
Still waiting for the first homicide that starts with : "Did you just take a video of my kid?"
Still waiting for the first google-glass-related homicide.
The one that starts with "Did you just take a video of my kid?"
7 - Unknown.
I wonder how these come to happen.
"Captain Johnson! Where the fuck are the two tons of plutonium you left the base with!"
*shrugs* "No idea."
"WHAT!"
"NO IDEA. SIR!"
"Ok, that's better. Try to be more careful with the next plutonium truck. Shit ain't growing on trees, you know?"
That clock moves almost as slow as the one in my work computer.
(dear fricking gawd! I swear it's been 17:14 for at least two days!)
Monaco is so chock full of spies you could cross the country, leaping from spy-car to spy-car without ever touching the ground.
I'm ready to believe it was all USA, posing as Canada posing as other countries, on its "double false flag" operations.