Price for a McD basic hamburger, 1euro. Price of a natural bagle with cream chease. 2,95.
A basic McD hamburger - 270-ish Calories. A bagel (Thomas's brand, for example, 210) + 2 tbsp cream cheese (50) - 310 Calories.
1 euro for a soft drink, 3 euro for a fruit shake
Soft drink - 0 Calories if it's diet. Fruit shake, depends on the brand and size, but I'm guessing about 140 for a small one.
Go to McDonalds. Save 180 calories. Every day you do that, you lose (or don't gain) 5% of a pound more than you would eating the bagel and fruit shake.
Sure, it's less "healthy", but you'll be less fat, and being fat is extremely unhealthy.
If you're already not fat, then sure, get the bagel. Or the McDonalds and choke down a multivitamin.
For instance, yes, a hamburger in a real restaurant is better, healthier, and more expensive than a hamburger at McDonald's
While "healthier" is very vague, a McDonalds Quarter Pounder With Cheese is about 510 Calories. Try finding a real restaurant hamburger weighing in at less than 900. It's tough. I've looked. Plus at McDonalds it doesn't come with fries unless you ask for it (granted, they're always happy to offer). A real restaurant is going to pile on about 10 ounces of fried potato, usually around 70 - 80 Calories per ounce, unless you tell them to substitute vegetables. And then they'll probably go in back and say, "Cheeseburger and veggies for Fatty McLardo at table 8." Though I still recommend the substitution.
You CAN eat low-cal at a real restaurant usually, but it's a WAAAAAY smaller menu, and you usually have to guess what's on it (some restaurants are improving and marking certain items with a helpful "this won't instantly give you a heart attack" asterisk). Whereas you can go to Wendy's (for example, not an endorsement), grab a salad or a grilled chicken sandwich and beat virtually anything at a "real restaurant", fatness-reduction-wise.
Of course, they'll also sell you a triple cheeseburger there. A delicious 960 Calorie reward dessert to congratulate yourself for only eating a 300 Calorie chicken sandwich.
What would be wrong with a web cam in every politician's office monitoring their actions and accessible by the general public, after all they are meant to be working for the public so the public should be able to supervise them.
I used to be all for that. Then I remembered that if they wanted to do something shady, briber and bribee could always just head into the bathroom to do the wink-wink, nudge-nudge part. If anyone ever asked why they were in the bathroom with the lobbyist, they could always just say it was for gay sex. It's air tight.
You'd just end up with countless hours of the politician sitting quietly, scratching his butt and smelling his finger, and then remembering there are cameras now and trying to pass it off as just scratching his lip.
Are you actually operating a $common_business_category business which operates primarily in, is based in, or offers something semi-exclusive to $common_city_name? If you are, you're not a squatter. If not, you warrant a closer look by the squat police (who currently have nothing to do but patrol my gym and make it very difficult to blast my quads and hammies).
I'd hate to have to write a huge essay apologizing for all the stuff that Kubrick screwed up in '2001'. Oh, wait, I couldn't do that if I wanted to, because people demanded more from their filmmakers back in the day.
Have you ever watched 2001? As I recall, it's 15 minutes of a plastic ship landing on the moon, 15 minutes of a sphere slowly wandering around a ship, 15 minutes of falling down a flashy tunnel, and 15 minutes of intermission, broken up by chunks of dialog in a style that thankfully currently only continues to exist in soap operas.
The science fiction element was great, the book was fantastic, but the movie is unwatchable without a cost-prohibitive amount of drugs. If it's a trade-off between watchability and technical accuracy, I hope Hollywood continues to err on the side of entertainment. Although, in a lot of cases, they could do both, and that would be ideal.
Stop it. You're playing into their hands. You keep coming up with the wrong conspiracies about conspiracies, the whole time letting the real conspirators on conspiracy conspire just as invisibly as you say the fake real conspirators do.
They were just afraid eh might win the whole thing.
Why would they be afraid of that? The worst that happens is that Steven Colbert wins South Carolina, a state that gave its 8 electoral votes to Bush in 2004 with a not-slim margin. Steve's got at least as good a chance as John Kerry, and about ten times the chance Clinton would have in South Carolina. No, the real Democrat presidential candidate wouldn't get the votes, but neither would the Republicans. Let the man play, see what happens.
But then again, he's got huge appeal, and write-in votes nationally might actually dent a national Clinton/Obama run. Maybe that's their worry.
Saves you from having to enter your SSN every time.
I haven't called, but I'm gathering from you that they ask you to enter it once? They send a piece of mail (with their logo on it, so you know it's really them) to you asking you to call a number that could be anyone and ask you to enter your social security number? Thanks, Verizon, for making identity theft even easier.
While I'm not a supporter of the anti-obscenity crowd, the difference is fairly clear. There is no natural, overwhelmingly powerful drive to murder every hot girl that will let you.
To paraphrase from memory, Sagan said that he had the security clearances and access and he saw nothing about the Gov. covering up space aliens.
And you believe him? Who do you think told him all that stuff he knows? How does he know that there are exactly billions and billions of stars? Answer that.
Seriously, we could have any legally binding contract go into a public database on the internet, which could be viewed by anyone.
Why? Aside from that being completely impractical and ultimately fruitless (when secret contracts are outlawed, only outlaws will have secret contracts), what business is it of yours what contracts anyone else signs? If you have a good legal reason to know, then you'll get it through legal action. If not, just because you want to know other people's business doesn't mean you get to.
I think that you have a responsibility to take reasonable precautions. I wouldn't leave my computer running and unlocked in a room where my roomates drunken buddies who don't like me very much could get at it, for a number of reasons nastier than sharing some non-drm'ed music.
Should I also lock my sock drawer, lest (the hypothetical )they defile my footwear?
If I leave the keys in my car and one of those drunken buddies drives it into a house, I'm liable for the damages, and I don't see why a computer should be any different.
What the hell country do you live in? Move immediately. Unless you handed him the steering wheel while you jumped out of the moving vehicle, I think you're probably okay, legally.
Get a real OS FFS. Even Windows hasn't really had that problem since SP2.
Correct. No operating system has a problem with trojans. Users do.
You can claim whatever you like. The fact is, the likelihood of someone correctly guessing that you have purchased a specific song from iTMS, and, though I don't know if there's a time/date stamp (but I would assume there is) getting that correct too, is pretty darn infinitesimal. I think this could qualify as "beyond reasonable doubt."
Unless you're not possessive of your computer enough to log out when you leave the room and they're your roommate. Or your roommate's drunken buddies that don't like you very much.
But more importantly, you can just say it was shared by one of the people that got it from you through one of the thousands upon thousands of trojans most people have on their machines.
Not to mention the hassle of loading your car's tank with a powder.
The fuel system is going to need a complete redesign, so there's nothing to stop them from putting a funnel with a vibrating channel to the tank to keep it moving. Just dump it in.
Regardless of whether or not that is true, Microsoft certainly does not think so by their actions.
"Some guys are taking our software without paying for it." "That helps us. Network effects and stuff." "Great! So we'll tell everyone to just go ahead and make all the copies they like." "No, dumbass. Then we get no money." "Okay, what if we just don't say anything?" "We're real popular, and people will figure out pretty quick that we don't do anything if they copy it, and we'll lose a ton of money." "How about we quietly enjoy the piracy while making a big show of going after a few of them so people still have that tiny, little bit of fear to keep them honest?" "Sounds good to me."
It's cheaper because if you charge 15 cents for a text message, you can sell 40 bajillion minutes for $8 a century, beating your competitor's 40 bajillion for $12.
The cheap minutes sell the plan, the texting makes the money.
Also, they can. This is how it works with a free market with ridiculously high barriers to entry. It's insane, but you'll eat it and you'll like it.
Though legitimately, I assume there is some overhead involved in creating a connection over and over (finding the customer's current cell and whatnot) rather than just maintaining one, but I can't imagine that actually comes close to making up the difference in price per bit.
I'm entirely serious. I have never seen a turn signal used for more than 5-or-so seconds beforehand, and that's pretty excessive unless you're trying to do something that's going to force someone else to slow down.
I see people cars all the time, in stopped traffic, several cars back from the intersection with their turn signals on.
Stopped in traffic, yes, of course, but why are they stopped in traffic if the person in front of them is coasting?
If you're far enough back from the light that coasting will make any difference, then they'd have to have their blinker on like 12 seconds before they got to the turn. No one will ever do that.
I do the same thing, but you have to pay attention to the situation behind you. Coasting to a red light means you're blocking the guy behind you, who may either be making a right on red but has to wait for you to get out of his way, or needs to get to the left turn lane to get the protected left before it changes. If there's someone following me and there's no one ahead turning, I just go ahead and waste the gas, for civilization's sake.
So if we leave Iraq, do the terrorists win or lose?
There are no ties in warfare.
Of course the terrorists win. That's what you get for agreeing to play a game whose conditions for victory are so horribly skewed in the other guy's favor. We've got to wipe out every single one of them. They just have to wait and shoot into the air every once in a while so everyone knows they didn't forfeit. So of course we're not going to win. We should have tried a lot harder to get them to play a different game.
the only reason this drug even exists is becuase money was able to be spent on R&D to create or discover the compound.
True, and for the record, I think this situation sucks from any angle. But maybe if they just set their price a little lower, they would be making more money than they will be now, and they wouldn't make people hate them.
Doing it over and over will kill innovation. Doing it a few times is tough love.
In any case, I think Merck's $4 billion in annual profits will keep them from having to pleasure businessmen in dark alleys for research money.
Slashdot Mirror
Price for a McD basic hamburger, 1euro. Price of a natural bagle with cream chease. 2,95.
A basic McD hamburger - 270-ish Calories. A bagel (Thomas's brand, for example, 210) + 2 tbsp cream cheese (50) - 310 Calories.
1 euro for a soft drink, 3 euro for a fruit shake
Soft drink - 0 Calories if it's diet. Fruit shake, depends on the brand and size, but I'm guessing about 140 for a small one.
Go to McDonalds. Save 180 calories. Every day you do that, you lose (or don't gain) 5% of a pound more than you would eating the bagel and fruit shake.
Sure, it's less "healthy", but you'll be less fat, and being fat is extremely unhealthy.
If you're already not fat, then sure, get the bagel. Or the McDonalds and choke down a multivitamin.
For instance, yes, a hamburger in a real restaurant is better, healthier, and more expensive than a hamburger at McDonald's
While "healthier" is very vague, a McDonalds Quarter Pounder With Cheese is about 510 Calories. Try finding a real restaurant hamburger weighing in at less than 900. It's tough. I've looked. Plus at McDonalds it doesn't come with fries unless you ask for it (granted, they're always happy to offer). A real restaurant is going to pile on about 10 ounces of fried potato, usually around 70 - 80 Calories per ounce, unless you tell them to substitute vegetables. And then they'll probably go in back and say, "Cheeseburger and veggies for Fatty McLardo at table 8." Though I still recommend the substitution.
You CAN eat low-cal at a real restaurant usually, but it's a WAAAAAY smaller menu, and you usually have to guess what's on it (some restaurants are improving and marking certain items with a helpful "this won't instantly give you a heart attack" asterisk). Whereas you can go to Wendy's (for example, not an endorsement), grab a salad or a grilled chicken sandwich and beat virtually anything at a "real restaurant", fatness-reduction-wise.
Of course, they'll also sell you a triple cheeseburger there. A delicious 960 Calorie reward dessert to congratulate yourself for only eating a 300 Calorie chicken sandwich.
What would be wrong with a web cam in every politician's office monitoring their actions and accessible by the general public, after all they are meant to be working for the public so the public should be able to supervise them.
I used to be all for that. Then I remembered that if they wanted to do something shady, briber and bribee could always just head into the bathroom to do the wink-wink, nudge-nudge part. If anyone ever asked why they were in the bathroom with the lobbyist, they could always just say it was for gay sex. It's air tight.
You'd just end up with countless hours of the politician sitting quietly, scratching his butt and smelling his finger, and then remembering there are cameras now and trying to pass it off as just scratching his lip.
People are much more likely to take friendly constructive criticism than change their mind because someone explains why they're morons.
That said, the original joke was funny, and funny things are always okay.
Are you actually operating a $common_business_category business which operates primarily in, is based in, or offers something semi-exclusive to $common_city_name? If you are, you're not a squatter. If not, you warrant a closer look by the squat police (who currently have nothing to do but patrol my gym and make it very difficult to blast my quads and hammies).
I'd hate to have to write a huge essay apologizing for all the stuff that Kubrick screwed up in '2001'. Oh, wait, I couldn't do that if I wanted to, because people demanded more from their filmmakers back in the day.
Have you ever watched 2001? As I recall, it's 15 minutes of a plastic ship landing on the moon, 15 minutes of a sphere slowly wandering around a ship, 15 minutes of falling down a flashy tunnel, and 15 minutes of intermission, broken up by chunks of dialog in a style that thankfully currently only continues to exist in soap operas.
The science fiction element was great, the book was fantastic, but the movie is unwatchable without a cost-prohibitive amount of drugs. If it's a trade-off between watchability and technical accuracy, I hope Hollywood continues to err on the side of entertainment. Although, in a lot of cases, they could do both, and that would be ideal.
Stop it. You're playing into their hands. You keep coming up with the wrong conspiracies about conspiracies, the whole time letting the real conspirators on conspiracy conspire just as invisibly as you say the fake real conspirators do.
They were just afraid eh might win the whole thing.
Why would they be afraid of that? The worst that happens is that Steven Colbert wins South Carolina, a state that gave its 8 electoral votes to Bush in 2004 with a not-slim margin. Steve's got at least as good a chance as John Kerry, and about ten times the chance Clinton would have in South Carolina. No, the real Democrat presidential candidate wouldn't get the votes, but neither would the Republicans. Let the man play, see what happens.
But then again, he's got huge appeal, and write-in votes nationally might actually dent a national Clinton/Obama run. Maybe that's their worry.
Saves you from having to enter your SSN every time.
I haven't called, but I'm gathering from you that they ask you to enter it once? They send a piece of mail (with their logo on it, so you know it's really them) to you asking you to call a number that could be anyone and ask you to enter your social security number? Thanks, Verizon, for making identity theft even easier.
While I'm not a supporter of the anti-obscenity crowd, the difference is fairly clear. There is no natural, overwhelmingly powerful drive to murder every hot girl that will let you.
To paraphrase from memory, Sagan said that he had the security clearances and access and he saw nothing about the Gov. covering up space aliens.
And you believe him? Who do you think told him all that stuff he knows? How does he know that there are exactly billions and billions of stars? Answer that.
i think thats kind of the point, as last time i checked there arnt many "outlaws" that head fortune 500 companies etc
The point is that if the contract is legal, then you have no reason to need to know about it.
Seriously, we could have any legally binding contract go into a public database on the internet, which could be viewed by anyone.
Why? Aside from that being completely impractical and ultimately fruitless (when secret contracts are outlawed, only outlaws will have secret contracts), what business is it of yours what contracts anyone else signs? If you have a good legal reason to know, then you'll get it through legal action. If not, just because you want to know other people's business doesn't mean you get to.
I think that you have a responsibility to take reasonable precautions. I wouldn't leave my computer running and unlocked in a room where my roomates drunken buddies who don't like me very much could get at it, for a number of reasons nastier than sharing some non-drm'ed music.
Should I also lock my sock drawer, lest (the hypothetical )they defile my footwear?
If I leave the keys in my car and one of those drunken buddies drives it into a house, I'm liable for the damages, and I don't see why a computer should be any different.
What the hell country do you live in? Move immediately. Unless you handed him the steering wheel while you jumped out of the moving vehicle, I think you're probably okay, legally.
Get a real OS FFS. Even Windows hasn't really had that problem since SP2.
Correct. No operating system has a problem with trojans. Users do.
You can claim whatever you like. The fact is, the likelihood of someone correctly guessing that you have purchased a specific song from iTMS, and, though I don't know if there's a time/date stamp (but I would assume there is) getting that correct too, is pretty darn infinitesimal. I think this could qualify as "beyond reasonable doubt."
Unless you're not possessive of your computer enough to log out when you leave the room and they're your roommate. Or your roommate's drunken buddies that don't like you very much.
But more importantly, you can just say it was shared by one of the people that got it from you through one of the thousands upon thousands of trojans most people have on their machines.
Not to mention the hassle of loading your car's tank with a powder.
The fuel system is going to need a complete redesign, so there's nothing to stop them from putting a funnel with a vibrating channel to the tank to keep it moving. Just dump it in.
Regardless of whether or not that is true, Microsoft certainly does not think so by their actions.
"Some guys are taking our software without paying for it."
"That helps us. Network effects and stuff."
"Great! So we'll tell everyone to just go ahead and make all the copies they like."
"No, dumbass. Then we get no money."
"Okay, what if we just don't say anything?"
"We're real popular, and people will figure out pretty quick that we don't do anything if they copy it, and we'll lose a ton of money."
"How about we quietly enjoy the piracy while making a big show of going after a few of them so people still have that tiny, little bit of fear to keep them honest?"
"Sounds good to me."
It's cheaper because if you charge 15 cents for a text message, you can sell 40 bajillion minutes for $8 a century, beating your competitor's 40 bajillion for $12.
The cheap minutes sell the plan, the texting makes the money.
Also, they can. This is how it works with a free market with ridiculously high barriers to entry. It's insane, but you'll eat it and you'll like it.
Though legitimately, I assume there is some overhead involved in creating a connection over and over (finding the customer's current cell and whatnot) rather than just maintaining one, but I can't imagine that actually comes close to making up the difference in price per bit.
I'm entirely serious. I have never seen a turn signal used for more than 5-or-so seconds beforehand, and that's pretty excessive unless you're trying to do something that's going to force someone else to slow down.
I see people cars all the time, in stopped traffic, several cars back from the intersection with their turn signals on.
Stopped in traffic, yes, of course, but why are they stopped in traffic if the person in front of them is coasting?
If you're far enough back from the light that coasting will make any difference, then they'd have to have their blinker on like 12 seconds before they got to the turn. No one will ever do that.
I do the same thing, but you have to pay attention to the situation behind you. Coasting to a red light means you're blocking the guy behind you, who may either be making a right on red but has to wait for you to get out of his way, or needs to get to the left turn lane to get the protected left before it changes. If there's someone following me and there's no one ahead turning, I just go ahead and waste the gas, for civilization's sake.
So if we leave Iraq, do the terrorists win or lose?
There are no ties in warfare.
Of course the terrorists win. That's what you get for agreeing to play a game whose conditions for victory are so horribly skewed in the other guy's favor. We've got to wipe out every single one of them. They just have to wait and shoot into the air every once in a while so everyone knows they didn't forfeit. So of course we're not going to win. We should have tried a lot harder to get them to play a different game.
Now if they would only do something about flying car fuel efficiency standards.
the only reason this drug even exists is becuase money was able to be spent on R&D to create or discover the compound.
True, and for the record, I think this situation sucks from any angle. But maybe if they just set their price a little lower, they would be making more money than they will be now, and they wouldn't make people hate them.
Doing it over and over will kill innovation. Doing it a few times is tough love.
In any case, I think Merck's $4 billion in annual profits will keep them from having to pleasure businessmen in dark alleys for research money.
I'll look into that. Thank ya. I appreciate it.