I'm posting this dummy text because when I post in a thread my moderation points that I just used here are removed. I accidentally downvoted when I wanted to upvote. Why can't Slashdot give me the option to change my moderation, like any other website does that allows voting on comments?
Evolution is about adaptation to a changing environment.
"Progress" has no part in any of it - what does that word even mean? That word implies a goal (how else can you make progress if not towards some goal).
Why can't they let us edit comments for 5 minutes after posting...the preview does not help, I always discover the typos only after I submit the comment. Sigh.
That eating sweets was bad for the teeth is common enough knowledge pretty much everywhere. but as you can easily see, it has little to no effect on the population.
What surprised me was the HUGE effect - that the problems went down to zero, and I'm not even doing anything extreme. I mean, I don't even try to avoid every last grain of sugar.
Before that I would have expected for the problems to become less, maybe even much less. But down to zero??? And I can now do pretty much whatever I want, without any punishment from my teeth, as I mentioned, even not brushing teeth is okay.
There is even more:
I used to always have teeth that required the occasional use of special toothpaste that had a very high fluoride content. When I only used normal toothpaste - even though it still had fluoride - my teeth would soon start to hurt, just being touched by the toothbrush was painful on some teeth.
I have been using zero(!)-fluoride toothpaste for the last couple of years! No problems at all. If I had tried that 10 years ago it would have been terrible.
So, knowing "too much sugar is bad for teeth" did not prepare me for the shear magnitude of the effect!
A personal anecdote - but one approved and confirmed as general dentist wisdom by a friend of mine who is a dentist.
I always had problems with cavities, since my youth there never was a dentist visit where they didn't drill. About 7 years ago I drastically cut back on sugar, not because of teeth but because of other issues (now resolved).
I used to be a typical German: I could not live without a bakery. I ate loads of bread, pasta, pizza (but actually good one) - and between meals not infrequently cookies or a piece of cake. I also ate quite a lot of chocolate and other sweets, always desert. LOTS and lots of fruit (self-made fruit salad!)
Before I give you the wrong idea that I may have to mention I never had a weight issue, I was very active too..Not that you think what I'm saying only applies to obese people and so what I'm writing does not apply to others. I could easily - and I mean easily - run a half marathon (never tried more than that), just for fun.
Anyway, my health issues forced me to experiment. To cut the story short and leave out all the experiments and everything in between, without consulting any book or "nutritionist", only learning to read and listen to what my own body was telling me, I ended up eating very few "carbs" (not the chemical meaning of the word but the kinds of foods). I almost never buy anything from the bakery, except for (very good!) white bread, which lasts two weeks or so (or even more). NO chocolate, no cake, no cookies. Very few fruits, and even less of the sweet kinds of fruits. Almost never bread, almost never pasta, almost never potatoes. NO SUGAR. Again, no extremes: I'm sure one or the other salad dressing I got when I didn't eat at home had sugar. I would not even mind eating a piece of cake now and then - if only I had any appetite for that stuff. I never do, not any more.
I don't have to force myself to any of it, it comes naturally now!
On the other hand, I eat a lot less meat than in the past too. Again not because of some "nutrition advice" that I follow, I really can't!
But I could never eat something as extreme as an Atkins diet. I _do_ need carbs (that's why the white bread), just very little. I could also never go without meat, go full vegetarian. No extremes (unless "No sweets" is something you consider extreme).
What I eat a lot more of: Fat and vegetables. Fat in the form of olive oil, nuts (lots! - what is the English word for "Nussmus"??? Darn!), cream. Quite abit of dairy, but zero milk, all in the form of cheese and other kinds of milk that went through bacterial processing.
MY TEETH:
I have suddenly had ZERO problems with my teeth for years! A complete change! And I don't even need to brush my teeth. Okay, for breath:-) Not a single cavity anywhere. My dentist friend just said "Of course, if you leave out the sugar that's to be expected."
Here is a link to a question that sheds some light on aspects pretty much always overlooked in discussions. Most people don't seem to understand what the issue is because very few people participating in these discussions own patents or ever thought much about it.
If a company, let's say a biotech company, owns patents - not on software, on _anything_ - finds that Facebook infringes on their patent they cannot sue them if they happen to use one of Facebook'S projects. So if Facebook were to start a spinoff that uses IP from the biomedical company they can do so, they wrote a blank check fro themselves. You have to trust them not to do that.
The above is not a statement of fact, it's the question that still is open (see link). The one answer there from yesterday (the Q itself is from Oct 2016) does not actually answer it either.
There's a real solid chance that Facebook is screwed.
From the article (if only people read before commenting):
The company about a year ago said that it would move away from ads on Facebook that target specific consumers, after finding that ultra-niche targeting compromises reach and has limited effectiveness.
The very next sentence though:
P&G indicated it wouldn’t pull back on overall Facebook spending.
Especially when posting a link to a video you should include a _summary_. That video is actually pretty good, based on the responses here I expected something much worse.
About the video:
Statistics: ~9 million views, 191,330 upvotes vs. 3,585 downvotes
The video is in support of the point raised in this story, "this time it's different", and they raise a few good points in support.
After watching the video I don't understand the response by drinkypoo about the horses, it does not seem to fit with what is said in the video _at all_.
> Snake Oil Salesmen Were on to Something > Snake oil really is a cure for what ails you, if that happens to be arthritis, heart disease or maybe even depression
> Snake Oil Salesmen Were on to Something > Snake oil really is a cure for what ails you, if that happens to be arthritis, heart disease or maybe even depression
Try Hacker News at https://news.ycombinator.com/ for better submissions - and also for much better discussions. I don't want to advertise it too much though, let the "funny" commenters and over-emotional downvoters who can't say anything technical about the subject(s) being discussed remain on all the other websites...:)
I think that technique is this: Post in Internet forums that you know a sales technique that is sooo effective it's forbidden. Don't go into any specifics! Just give enough pointers that people can find the book. Sold!
Really, the website I found after actually googling your hints had no useful content whatsoever, and did not talk about any ingenious sale strategy. What it said could be on any generic sales newsletter.
Different rules for different people is pretty much the definition of unfair.
Only among equals. There are different rules for employers and employees too. China is stronger than a decade ago but still far behind the US.
GDP per capita (2015 in USD) USA: $55,805, China: $7,990
Protecting a growing and still weak market is normal and proven to be a necessary step when growing an economy. There is no "equality" when you have "equal" access (which is anything but) between two highly unequal economies. The reason China seems so strong - with so much in the US marked "Made in China" - isn't because China is an advanced economy but because China is a huge country with a billion(!) more people than the US.
It's nice to see that recycling between the various forum sites works well. I don't really mind, I don't even ever complain about reposts unless they are too frequent, but here's the link to the long discussion of the exact same article:
If they would have waited some years it would been a remain.
You assume people don't change their mind. Young people have different needs and experiences. You can't just make such an assumption based on no information but age, you will have to do the boring and very work of actually looking of looking at the details - the "Why?".
You say "them" - like everybody else who is about to find out they are "them" or will be shortly. Unless you are a capitalist *you are "them"*. I'm a 6-figure making IT specialist with broad knowledge - and I feel concerned. Ones abilities are secondary to "the market" - as well as to biases. Above 40 you can easily fall through the cracks no matter your qualification (unless it's really extraordinary AND happens to be in demand too). There are lots of factors beyond your control.
Plenty of high-paid people who were laid off in their fifties who ranted about the lazy people unwilling to work found out that "them" is them when they were laid off and job application after application was rejected, often without even getting a response.
...is objectively a punishment making a statement such as yours ("I have no idea how anyone could say it's about punishing the company.") takes an extraordinary level of cognitive dissonance. You are quite amazing.
It's a statistical rule, not an absolute. Individual examples are useless, it's all in the numbers.
Second, even if there was a 100% turnover in the circle of billionaires, what would that change? Nothing! It would still be just es exclusive and heavily luck-based.
"All vs. Any": *Anyone* can become a millionaire in the lottery, but what does that doe for *everyone*?
There was just rambling! ZERO arguments, 100% opinion. You seem to be of the *opinion* that having a string feeling equals "arguments": It doesn't. I'm modded troll by a troll, and the parent post this is about is the biggest troll post of all. More and more little kids on Slashdot with "opinions" unable to express ANY argument.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm posting this dummy text because when I post in a thread my moderation points that I just used here are removed. I accidentally downvoted when I wanted to upvote. Why can't Slashdot give me the option to change my moderation, like any other website does that allows voting on comments?
Ever heard about glial cells?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Most common types of brain tumors: http://braintumor.org/brain-tu...
Evolution is about adaptation to a changing environment.
"Progress" has no part in any of it - what does that word even mean? That word implies a goal (how else can you make progress if not towards some goal).
https://youtu.be/t6AHCK3if-I
I only watched the first five minutes but that's enough.
Why do you write something that somebody else already said and that I had already responded to? See by phantomfive's comment and my reply to it.
> But I think you went overboard with the bread and pasta and stuff.
Please reread :-)
Why can't they let us edit comments for 5 minutes after posting...the preview does not help, I always discover the typos only after I submit the comment. Sigh.
That eating sweets was bad for the teeth is common enough knowledge pretty much everywhere. but as you can easily see, it has little to no effect on the population.
What surprised me was the HUGE effect - that the problems went down to zero, and I'm not even doing anything extreme. I mean, I don't even try to avoid every last grain of sugar.
Before that I would have expected for the problems to become less, maybe even much less. But down to zero??? And I can now do pretty much whatever I want, without any punishment from my teeth, as I mentioned, even not brushing teeth is okay.
There is even more:
I used to always have teeth that required the occasional use of special toothpaste that had a very high fluoride content. When I only used normal toothpaste - even though it still had fluoride - my teeth would soon start to hurt, just being touched by the toothbrush was painful on some teeth.
I have been using zero(!)-fluoride toothpaste for the last couple of years! No problems at all. If I had tried that 10 years ago it would have been terrible.
So, knowing "too much sugar is bad for teeth" did not prepare me for the shear magnitude of the effect!
A personal anecdote - but one approved and confirmed as general dentist wisdom by a friend of mine who is a dentist.
I always had problems with cavities, since my youth there never was a dentist visit where they didn't drill. About 7 years ago I drastically cut back on sugar, not because of teeth but because of other issues (now resolved).
I used to be a typical German: I could not live without a bakery. I ate loads of bread, pasta, pizza (but actually good one) - and between meals not infrequently cookies or a piece of cake. I also ate quite a lot of chocolate and other sweets, always desert. LOTS and lots of fruit (self-made fruit salad!)
Before I give you the wrong idea that I may have to mention I never had a weight issue, I was very active too..Not that you think what I'm saying only applies to obese people and so what I'm writing does not apply to others. I could easily - and I mean easily - run a half marathon (never tried more than that), just for fun.
Anyway, my health issues forced me to experiment. To cut the story short and leave out all the experiments and everything in between, without consulting any book or "nutritionist", only learning to read and listen to what my own body was telling me, I ended up eating very few "carbs" (not the chemical meaning of the word but the kinds of foods). I almost never buy anything from the bakery, except for (very good!) white bread, which lasts two weeks or so (or even more). NO chocolate, no cake, no cookies. Very few fruits, and even less of the sweet kinds of fruits. Almost never bread, almost never pasta, almost never potatoes. NO SUGAR. Again, no extremes: I'm sure one or the other salad dressing I got when I didn't eat at home had sugar. I would not even mind eating a piece of cake now and then - if only I had any appetite for that stuff. I never do, not any more.
I don't have to force myself to any of it, it comes naturally now!
On the other hand, I eat a lot less meat than in the past too. Again not because of some "nutrition advice" that I follow, I really can't!
But I could never eat something as extreme as an Atkins diet. I _do_ need carbs (that's why the white bread), just very little. I could also never go without meat, go full vegetarian. No extremes (unless "No sweets" is something you consider extreme).
What I eat a lot more of: Fat and vegetables. Fat in the form of olive oil, nuts (lots! - what is the English word for "Nussmus"??? Darn!), cream. Quite abit of dairy, but zero milk, all in the form of cheese and other kinds of milk that went through bacterial processing.
MY TEETH:
I have suddenly had ZERO problems with my teeth for years! A complete change! And I don't even need to brush my teeth. Okay, for breath :-) Not a single cavity anywhere. My dentist friend just said "Of course, if you leave out the sugar that's to be expected."
Here is a link to a question that sheds some light on aspects pretty much always overlooked in discussions. Most people don't seem to understand what the issue is because very few people participating in these discussions own patents or ever thought much about it.
https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/14337/q-about-consequences-of-a-software-license-amendment-regarding-patents-facebook
Basically, the issue is this:
If a company, let's say a biotech company, owns patents - not on software, on _anything_ - finds that Facebook infringes on their patent they cannot sue them if they happen to use one of Facebook'S projects. So if Facebook were to start a spinoff that uses IP from the biomedical company they can do so, they wrote a blank check fro themselves. You have to trust them not to do that.
The above is not a statement of fact, it's the question that still is open (see link). The one answer there from yesterday (the Q itself is from Oct 2016) does not actually answer it either.
Noishkel wrote:
From the article (if only people read before commenting):
The very next sentence though:
Especially when posting a link to a video you should include a _summary_. That video is actually pretty good, based on the responses here I expected something much worse.
About the video:
Statistics: ~9 million views, 191,330 upvotes vs. 3,585 downvotes
The video is in support of the point raised in this story, "this time it's different", and they raise a few good points in support.
After watching the video I don't understand the response by drinkypoo about the horses, it does not seem to fit with what is said in the video _at all_.
The video comes with a link to a reddit trhead about it: http://www.reddit.com/r/CGPGre...
...for arthritis, heart disease or maybe even depression:
https://www.scientificamerican...
> Snake Oil Salesmen Were on to Something
> Snake oil really is a cure for what ails you, if that happens to be arthritis, heart disease or maybe even depression
Just found this today on HN: "Snake oil can be beneficial for arthritis and other conditions (2007)"
https://news.ycombinator.com/i...
The article being discussed is
https://www.scientificamerican...
> Snake Oil Salesmen Were on to Something
> Snake oil really is a cure for what ails you, if that happens to be arthritis, heart disease or maybe even depression
Try Hacker News at https://news.ycombinator.com/ for better submissions - and also for much better discussions. I don't want to advertise it too much though, let the "funny" commenters and over-emotional downvoters who can't say anything technical about the subject(s) being discussed remain on all the other websites... :)
I think that technique is this: Post in Internet forums that you know a sales technique that is sooo effective it's forbidden. Don't go into any specifics! Just give enough pointers that people can find the book. Sold!
Really, the website I found after actually googling your hints had no useful content whatsoever, and did not talk about any ingenious sale strategy. What it said could be on any generic sales newsletter.
Different rules for different people is pretty much the definition of unfair.
Only among equals. There are different rules for employers and employees too. China is stronger than a decade ago but still far behind the US.
GDP per capita (2015 in USD) USA: $55,805, China: $7,990
Protecting a growing and still weak market is normal and proven to be a necessary step when growing an economy. There is no "equality" when you have "equal" access (which is anything but) between two highly unequal economies. The reason China seems so strong - with so much in the US marked "Made in China" - isn't because China is an advanced economy but because China is a huge country with a billion(!) more people than the US.
It's nice to see that recycling between the various forum sites works well. I don't really mind, I don't even ever complain about reposts unless they are too frequent, but here's the link to the long discussion of the exact same article:
https://news.ycombinator.com/i...
If they would have waited some years it would been a remain.
You assume people don't change their mind. Young people have different needs and experiences. You can't just make such an assumption based on no information but age, you will have to do the boring and very work of actually looking of looking at the details - the "Why?".
You say "them" - like everybody else who is about to find out they are "them" or will be shortly. Unless you are a capitalist *you are "them"*. I'm a 6-figure making IT specialist with broad knowledge - and I feel concerned. Ones abilities are secondary to "the market" - as well as to biases. Above 40 you can easily fall through the cracks no matter your qualification (unless it's really extraordinary AND happens to be in demand too). There are lots of factors beyond your control.
Plenty of high-paid people who were laid off in their fifties who ranted about the lazy people unwilling to work found out that "them" is them when they were laid off and job application after application was rejected, often without even getting a response.
...the recipient to *feel* defrauded. It doesn't count if you as an uninvolved 3rd party feels a transaction between other people is fraud.
...is objectively a punishment making a statement such as yours ("I have no idea how anyone could say it's about punishing the company.") takes an extraordinary level of cognitive dissonance. You are quite amazing.
It's a statistical rule, not an absolute. Individual examples are useless, it's all in the numbers.
Second, even if there was a 100% turnover in the circle of billionaires, what would that change? Nothing! It would still be just es exclusive and heavily luck-based.
"All vs. Any": *Anyone* can become a millionaire in the lottery, but what does that doe for *everyone*?
So you are saying those theories were NOT TESTED?
> Purely empirical science gave us the "element of fire", phologoston.
The reason we went beyond that is because It could be tested and proven wrong.
The discussion is about "testing no longer needed", not "testing done later". As it clearly says in article and even summary.
> There was value there
There was just rambling! ZERO arguments, 100% opinion. You seem to be of the *opinion* that having a string feeling equals "arguments": It doesn't. I'm modded troll by a troll, and the parent post this is about is the biggest troll post of all. More and more little kids on Slashdot with "opinions" unable to express ANY argument.