Yes, but do those people have "getting shot" on their list of likely risks while on the job?
You mean like taxi drivers?
The risk of "getting shot" as a police officer is not nearly as great as some people seem to think. Most officer fatalities come from car accidents. Most cabbie fatalities come from assaults.
Just to nitpick, your body can produce ATP from fatty acids instead of glucose. (Yes, glucose is still needed in small amounts, but it's not the One True Energy Source.)
Re:More american-centric blabbering.
on
Is Sugar Toxic?
·
· Score: 1
Wow. As others have already addressed the incredible wrongness of the "no other country" bit, I'll take on the other half:
ATP can be generated from fatty acids. Eating sucrose, or glucose, is not a fundamental necessity of life. Your heart and skeletal muscles actually prefer fatty acids over glucose as a source for producing ATP.
Note that the model does show this; an initial 70% chance dropping to 26% as the mission changed.
It's not a new frontier in warfare style; insurgencies have existed back to Roman times and beyond. What is different are the methods used to combat them; for moral reasons we do not permit ourselves to use the traditional techniques. (Plus, its being a bloody mess of cronyism, profiteering, and sectarian violence hasn't helped matters any.)
It's pretty clearly noted in the article that only the audio portion of the recording was considered to fall afoul of the law. But, a videotape of a person speaking could be taken to a person who lip-reads to obtain a later transcript of a conversation. (And how admissible might such a transcript be if needed later?)
I'm also curious to know whether the subject, as a passenger in the vehicle, would be considered a party to the conversation (something that some wiretapping statutes take into account).
Realize that terms like "vestibulo-ocular reflex" exist only to permit one person in the field to concisely convey mutually understood concepts to another person in the same field. Using specialized terms will save you perhaps a dozen words at the expense of being understood.
For a small child, they'll be able to understand that they know when they are moving, and in what direction, and they might even be able to tell you how they [think] they know that. If you have models of the canals in the inner ear, (I'm imagining tubes filled with coloured dye) you can provide an excellent demonstration that they should easily understand.
(BTW, I agree with Janek Kozicki's comment on high expections. While I was able to understand fairly advanced concepts at a young age, it wasn't because I was under pressure. My environment simply encouraged it; one family friend was a physics professor, another let me help out at the local natural history museum, etc.)
For another data point, when they dropped speed limits in Montana, the rate of fatal accidents plunged, stayed low for a few years, and then shot back up after speed limits were reinstated. Seat belt usage also improved during that time, as did proper lane usage (e.g. slower traffic keeping right).
In terms of basic traffic engineering principles, most people don't become race car drivers when you remove the speed limits. Traffic will often stabilize around 80 mph, or whatever speed is appropriate for the road. This is why the 80th percentile rule works, which is the proper way of setting speed limits if they're absolutely necessary. (You see how fast traffic travels on the road when no limit is imposed, then set the limit at the 80th percentile of the observed speeds.)
When you don't follow good engineering principles, you get accidents. Unfortunately, the meme of "speed kills" has spread too widely, and so we are left with improperly set limits and an unnecessary amount of fatal accidents.
Depends where you are; in many places you can be cited for travelling slower than the flow of traffic if you aren't in the rightmost lane (not sure about wrong-hand drive countries).
Agree with you on the coasting to a red bit; unless the guy knows the timing of the lights, that's just being stupid.
The source language of the word also matters. In this case, I would refer not to "the Alps" but to "the Sierra Nevada" or "the Sierra Madre".
Also, neither "alps" nor "sierra" appear to refer to a plural, even though the -s ending of "alps" may create that impression. (While "alp" also exists as a word, it was a back-formation from the original "alps".)
It is, they did, and no, they didn't have a signal.
Most cases, you won't get a signal in the wilderness, which is why relying on cell phones is a bad idea.
The good news is, they did get a brief connection to a cell tower earlier while driving, and a phone company employee who spent his weekend looking over the logs spotted this, which helped narrow down the search. (And may be the reason the rest of the family is still alive.)
I wouldn't consider houses indicative of salaries. If you look at Shiller's chart of home prices [ http://praetor.org/images/shiller-home-prices.jpg ], and compare to incomes, you might suspect something odd is going on.
An explanation lies in the amount of loans that are interest-only, 0% down, and often stated-income (referred to in some circles as "liar" loans). While is is possible that many are able to somehow service this debt, the trend in missed mortgage payments (especially in the first 12-months, a/very/ bad sign) suggests that a great many people bought more house than they could handle.
Define "appropriate". In most American jurisdictions, speed limits are set artificially low. (I.e., proper traffic engineering is to follow the 80th percentile rule for setting the speed limit.)
This also makes it harder for most people to realize the purpose behind the "slow traffic keep right" laws, which is to set up a speed gradient across different lanes, with all cars in a given lane travelling at the same approximate speed.
Speed limits don't save lives; those speed gradients do. Raising freeway limits to an appropriate level, or removing them entirely, would significantly reduce freeway fatalities. It's why Montana saw a large drop in fatal accidents when they removed the speed limits, and a similar huge jump when they were forced to reinstate them.
Partially true, except that the revenue stream can get addictive. Pretty soon, you have small towns with sudden speed limit drops, and intersections where the yellow lights keep getting shorter and shorter.
What happens? Revenue goes up, accidents go up, and you get people clamoring for something to be done, which obviously means the solution is more lights with cameras, and even lower speed limits.
The point of the interrogation technique is to see if you can maintain consistency; the Brazil question was likely used in a similar manner. (Although, simple ignorance is always a possibility.) From their point of view, you could be anyone, and their goal is not to believe your story, but to see how well it holds up.
In terms of the other guy, he appears to have some sort of valid documentation, and his last name is not a good enough excuse. You're the one with the expired passport, working as a "consultant" (which while technically makes you "employed", doesn't help much from an interrogator's standpoint). All things considered, the interrogation seems to have been handled reasonably professionally.
I find your suggestion to "work hard, live a fiscally responsible lifestyle, live below your means" to be about as helpful as Marie Antoinette's suggestion that the poor should "eat cake if they have no bread". I suspect you have no idea of the magnitude of health care costs.
I work hard, and live within my means. I'm fortunate enough to make more than a goodly percentage of the population while not similarly scaling up my expenses. Assuming all goes well, and my reasonable investments provide a reasonable rate of return, by the time I hit retirement age I will be reasonably well off.
Were I to fall ill, the price of care is such that I could easily face bankruptcy. This is without factoring cost increases, which are currently growing at increasing rates. So, if I'm screwed, and I'm making more, and being more responsible than most of the US; where does it leave them? For that matter, where does it leave you?
Sure the salespeople are idiots, you expected different? One of the first things I do when getting a new phone is making sure it's unlocked; It's the telecom equivalent of making your DVD player region-free.
spagetti_code is generally correct. You can outperform most fund managers by the simple technique of picking stocks at random, and the market as a whole has tended to average 11% returns over the long term.
I would point out that you get poorer results if you look at random 20 or 30 year slices of the "long term". Since this is the time period many people might be investing for, the index fund option is much less appealing.
The random performance of the market is due to the large number of companies involved. If you look at specific companies, and choose on the basis of good management, good finances, etc., you can easily find companies that will go up in value even when the indexes are heading down. For example, the S&P500 dropped 35% from '00 to '03, but Unilever went up 40% in that same period.
Why pay rent when your morgtage and tax money are close to the same amount
What strange place do you live in, where this is the case?
Over here in the SF Bay Area, my rent is roughly equivalent to interest payments alone, were I to "buy". Of course, I'm not about to "claim" 300,000 in income just to get an IO loan in the hopes that prices will rise the necessary 10% or so for me to break even when I have to sell the property because the loan reset and I actually have to pay off the principle.
Long term, housing isn't all that good an investment. Short term, in a booming market, it can generate amazing profits, but the term for that is "speculation".
They don't have to be. They just have to link the number with the name on the credit card you hand them when buying the lastest trendy shirt. That'd be enough to cover about 98% of their customers.
He is talking about the Ender's Game of which you are thinking. The 3D part was in the Battle School, after which the kids where training on "simulations" of spacecraft battles. The poster is not referring to the training, but to what Ender and Bean realized at the end of the book.
> it support the 149.990 frequency they will be broadcasting on
Except they won't be broadcasting on 149.990. (You might want to check the article again before you get to enjoy the sound of faint static in the morning.)
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, but do those people have "getting shot" on their list of likely risks while on the job?
You mean like taxi drivers?
The risk of "getting shot" as a police officer is not nearly as great as some people seem to think. Most officer fatalities come from car accidents. Most cabbie fatalities come from assaults.
Just to nitpick, your body can produce ATP from fatty acids instead of glucose. (Yes, glucose is still needed in small amounts, but it's not the One True Energy Source.)
Wow. As others have already addressed the incredible wrongness of the "no other country" bit, I'll take on the other half:
ATP can be generated from fatty acids. Eating sucrose, or glucose, is not a fundamental necessity of life. Your heart and skeletal muscles actually prefer fatty acids over glucose as a source for producing ATP.
Note that the model does show this; an initial 70% chance dropping to 26% as the mission changed.
It's not a new frontier in warfare style; insurgencies have existed back to Roman times and beyond. What is different are the methods used to combat them; for moral reasons we do not permit ourselves to use the traditional techniques. (Plus, its being a bloody mess of cronyism, profiteering, and sectarian violence hasn't helped matters any.)
It's pretty clearly noted in the article that only the audio portion of the recording was considered to fall afoul of the law. But, a videotape of a person speaking could be taken to a person who lip-reads to obtain a later transcript of a conversation. (And how admissible might such a transcript be if needed later?)
I'm also curious to know whether the subject, as a passenger in the vehicle, would be considered a party to the conversation (something that some wiretapping statutes take into account).
Realize that terms like "vestibulo-ocular reflex" exist only to permit one person in the field to concisely convey mutually understood concepts to another person in the same field. Using specialized terms will save you perhaps a dozen words at the expense of being understood.
For a small child, they'll be able to understand that they know when they are moving, and in what direction, and they might even be able to tell you how they [think] they know that. If you have models of the canals in the inner ear, (I'm imagining tubes filled with coloured dye) you can provide an excellent demonstration that they should easily understand.
(BTW, I agree with Janek Kozicki's comment on high expections. While I was able to understand fairly advanced concepts at a young age, it wasn't because I was under pressure. My environment simply encouraged it; one family friend was a physics professor, another let me help out at the local natural history museum, etc.)
For another data point, when they dropped speed limits in Montana, the rate of fatal accidents plunged, stayed low for a few years, and then shot back up after speed limits were reinstated. Seat belt usage also improved during that time, as did proper lane usage (e.g. slower traffic keeping right).
In terms of basic traffic engineering principles, most people don't become race car drivers when you remove the speed limits. Traffic will often stabilize around 80 mph, or whatever speed is appropriate for the road. This is why the 80th percentile rule works, which is the proper way of setting speed limits if they're absolutely necessary. (You see how fast traffic travels on the road when no limit is imposed, then set the limit at the 80th percentile of the observed speeds.)
When you don't follow good engineering principles, you get accidents. Unfortunately, the meme of "speed kills" has spread too widely, and so we are left with improperly set limits and an unnecessary amount of fatal accidents.
Depends where you are; in many places you can be cited for travelling slower than the flow of traffic if you aren't in the rightmost lane (not sure about wrong-hand drive countries).
Agree with you on the coasting to a red bit; unless the guy knows the timing of the lights, that's just being stupid.
The source language of the word also matters. In this case, I would refer not to "the Alps" but to "the Sierra Nevada" or "the Sierra Madre".
Also, neither "alps" nor "sierra" appear to refer to a plural, even though the -s ending of "alps" may create that impression. (While "alp" also exists as a word, it was a back-formation from the original "alps".)
It is, they did, and no, they didn't have a signal.
Most cases, you won't get a signal in the wilderness, which is why relying on cell phones is a bad idea.
The good news is, they did get a brief connection to a cell tower earlier while driving, and a phone company employee who spent his weekend looking over the logs spotted this, which helped narrow down the search. (And may be the reason the rest of the family is still alive.)
I wouldn't consider houses indicative of salaries. If you look at Shiller's chart of home prices [ http://praetor.org/images/shiller-home-prices.jpg ], and compare to incomes, you might suspect something odd is going on.
/very/ bad sign) suggests that a great many people bought more house than they could handle.
An explanation lies in the amount of loans that are interest-only, 0% down, and often stated-income (referred to in some circles as "liar" loans). While is is possible that many are able to somehow service this debt, the trend in missed mortgage payments (especially in the first 12-months, a
Define "appropriate". In most American jurisdictions, speed limits are set artificially low. (I.e., proper traffic engineering is to follow the 80th percentile rule for setting the speed limit.)
This also makes it harder for most people to realize the purpose behind the "slow traffic keep right" laws, which is to set up a speed gradient across different lanes, with all cars in a given lane travelling at the same approximate speed.
Speed limits don't save lives; those speed gradients do. Raising freeway limits to an appropriate level, or removing them entirely, would significantly reduce freeway fatalities. It's why Montana saw a large drop in fatal accidents when they removed the speed limits, and a similar huge jump when they were forced to reinstate them.
Partially true, except that the revenue stream can get addictive. Pretty soon, you have small towns with sudden speed limit drops, and intersections where the yellow lights keep getting shorter and shorter.
What happens? Revenue goes up, accidents go up, and you get people clamoring for something to be done, which obviously means the solution is more lights with cameras, and even lower speed limits.
The point of the interrogation technique is to see if you can maintain consistency; the Brazil question was likely used in a similar manner. (Although, simple ignorance is always a possibility.) From their point of view, you could be anyone, and their goal is not to believe your story, but to see how well it holds up.
In terms of the other guy, he appears to have some sort of valid documentation, and his last name is not a good enough excuse. You're the one with the expired passport, working as a "consultant" (which while technically makes you "employed", doesn't help much from an interrogator's standpoint). All things considered, the interrogation seems to have been handled reasonably professionally.
Sir.
I find your suggestion to "work hard, live a fiscally responsible lifestyle, live below your means" to be about as helpful as Marie Antoinette's suggestion that the poor should "eat cake if they have no bread". I suspect you have no idea of the magnitude of health care costs.
I work hard, and live within my means. I'm fortunate enough to make more than a goodly percentage of the population while not similarly scaling up my expenses. Assuming all goes well, and my reasonable investments provide a reasonable rate of return, by the time I hit retirement age I will be reasonably well off.
Were I to fall ill, the price of care is such that I could easily face bankruptcy. This is without factoring cost increases, which are currently growing at increasing rates. So, if I'm screwed, and I'm making more, and being more responsible than most of the US; where does it leave them? For that matter, where does it leave you?
So unlock them.
Sure the salespeople are idiots, you expected different? One of the first things I do when getting a new phone is making sure it's unlocked; It's the telecom equivalent of making your DVD player region-free.
spagetti_code is generally correct. You can outperform most fund managers by the simple technique of picking stocks at random, and the market as a whole has tended to average 11% returns over the long term.
I would point out that you get poorer results if you look at random 20 or 30 year slices of the "long term". Since this is the time period many people might be investing for, the index fund option is much less appealing.
The random performance of the market is due to the large number of companies involved. If you look at specific companies, and choose on the basis of good management, good finances, etc., you can easily find companies that will go up in value even when the indexes are heading down. For example, the S&P500 dropped 35% from '00 to '03, but Unilever went up 40% in that same period.
Why pay rent when your morgtage and tax money are close to the same amount
What strange place do you live in, where this is the case?
Over here in the SF Bay Area, my rent is roughly equivalent to interest payments alone, were I to "buy". Of course, I'm not about to "claim" 300,000 in income just to get an IO loan in the hopes that prices will rise the necessary 10% or so for me to break even when I have to sell the property because the loan reset and I actually have to pay off the principle.
Long term, housing isn't all that good an investment. Short term, in a booming market, it can generate amazing profits, but the term for that is "speculation".
That case is why Congress passed ECPA in the mid-80s.
Please review 18 USC, Section 2511(2)(f).
Title III, ECPA, and FISA are the only legal means for the government to engage in domestic electronic surveillance.
I've flown United and at least one other and they weren't nearly as bad as Delta.
"Here are the meals we offer. Remember, if you had flown our 'elite class', we wouldn't be charging you for your meal."
It's a lively file. We get tons of flames and trolls.
Not now it isn't.
(still bitter that root hasn't got to my account yet.)
He's the type who has "elite double gold status" just so he can butt in front of you after waiting 25 mins to get a fucking eticket, etc, etc, etc.
/hate/ Delta. I've never seen an airline that spent so much effort pushing its class system.
That's why I
They don't have to be. They just have to link the number with the name on the credit card you hand them when buying the lastest trendy shirt. That'd be enough to cover about 98% of their customers.
He is talking about the Ender's Game of which you are thinking. The 3D part was in the Battle School, after which the kids where training on "simulations" of spacecraft battles. The poster is not referring to the training, but to what Ender and Bean realized at the end of the book.
> it support the 149.990 frequency they will be broadcasting on
Except they won't be broadcasting on 149.990. (You might want to check the article again before you get to enjoy the sound of faint static in the morning.)