Nobody cooks in naked cast iron. We use seasoned cast iron that has a protective layer of carbonized fat adhereing to it. I've made homemade tomato sauce in mine many times with no ill effects to either the dutch oven or the sauce.
Antibiotic abuse has the potential to kill many many more people than all the murderers in all of our prisons combined. We'd be safer letting the murderers out, and watching antibiotics like they are plutonium.
Unless you have people that can ABX the difference, no their criticisms are not scientifically founded. An actual blind test beats any theoretical reasoning any day.
44.1hkz 16bit audio is completely transparent to the human ear. No one has ever been able to detect when a 16bit DAC ADC pair has been placed in a 24/96 audio path.
Your preference for 24/96 audio as a listener is entirely due to the placebo effect. There are good reasons to master audio in high res, but for listening 16 bit 44.1khz audio is as good as anything.
No you can't. Not with any reasonably modern encoder and bitrates above 256. Anyone who tells you otherwise is experiencing the placbo effect. BTW, you can't tell the difference between 16bit/44.1khz audio and 24/96 audio either. And vinyl might sound "better" than digital to you, but digital is objectively more accurate.
Audiophilia is saturated with woo. This is the same market that brought us $500 ethernet cables.
At it's basic level cooking does not require much physical dexterity, but to expect a begineer to be able to follow instructions for the first time and get it right is like thinking a beginner can read a book on basketball and then make a shot for the first time. It is not a reasonable expectation.
Physical dexterity has to be learned. Like you say, there's no physical dexterity in cooking. So this isn't a valid analogy at all.
The reason some people think it is a reasonable expectation is that they have background
This just isn't true. My mom's a barely passable cook, and my dad was good, but I never watched him. Ever. After reaching adulthood, I ate meat with a side of veggies for several years. Then I decided I wanted to impress women, so I got on the internet found some recipes and followed them. To this day I can't think of anything where I followed the recipe exactly and didn't work. Today my girlfriend tells me I'm a much better cook than her, and it's entirely do to me reading and following instructions.
If one have never used a dutch oven to cook in the oven, then there is going to be no possibility of success.
I've never cooked with a dutch oven in the oven, but I've braised in other containers, and it's always worked. If you follow instructions, it works.
One would not expect a random person off the street to come in a code even 'hello world' in C simply from instructions
Why not? If I could pick up an Intro to C book and read it on my own, and do all the exercises, why wouldn't I expect anyone else to be able to do the same?
If you can't drop it in a campfire, what good is it? I have a cast iron "dutch oven" without legs and no rim on the lid. I can't figure out what it's good for. I already have a slow cooker and an oven, so...?
Your loss, dutch ovens are awesome. It's a slow cooker AND an oven, that you can take camping. Although I would never recommend a porcelain one. Cast iron or nothing.
Why do they all think they're right? Because there's been a decades long propaganda war against opiates, and there hasn't been one against antibiotic abuse, which is far, far, far more dangerous. Let her complain, let them all complain. Their complaints aren't valid, and should in no way affect your employment.
If you prescribe an antibiotic for a virus, even once, you deserve to go to jail.
GPs in the UK get 8 minutes with each patient, they can't afford to spend it arguing with the patient
It takes less than a second to say "no". If I came in to your wife's office and demanded oxycodone, what would she do? Why shouldn't she do the same thing when a patient demands antibiotics?
Absolutely. Any physician who prescribes an antibiotic for a viral infection should lose his license immediately. And he should probably end up in jail. We are running out of antibiotics, and when we do, it's back to medieval life expectancy. Antibiotic abuse has the potential to kill millions of people.
IMO, every recreational drug should be legally available over the counter. But every antibiotic should be extremely closely monitored. Make people show up to a clinic for their antibiotics, the way methadone users have to today. If you don't show up to complete your course, you go to jail.
And ban the agricultural use of antibiotics. Factory farms where thousands of cows and chickens and pigs are kept in close quarters and fed antibiotics by the shovelful are nothing but petri dishes for the development of antibiotic resistance. Meat is not important enough to jeopardize one of the corner stones of modern medicine.
Michael Moore made more on his movie Fahrenheit 911 in the year it was released than Halliburton made in the same year on Iraqi contracts.
So Haliburton's stock going from $10 to over $40 today had nothing to do with it?
There is no basis for such a claim other than "I think W is evil".
Sounds a lot like the justification for the Iraq war, just s/W/Saddam/
Iraq is better off today than it was 10 years ago. The people are wealthier, live in a more stable society, and have far less violence. Chicago is actually a much more dangerous city than Baghdad, and it's less than 1/3 of the size. Try to refute these simple facts if you can.
And all it took was a few hundred thousand dead. Still doesn't make the Iraq war legal.
Bush went to war with a legal authorization from an elected congress
Preemptive war is illegal under the UN Charter, which as a properly ratified treaty, is supreme law of the land according to Article VI of the Constitution.
The US has ratified the UN charter which prohibits preemptive war. According to Article VI of the Constitution:
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding
Violating a treaty is as illegal as violating an act of congress.
The biggest threats to our freedom, safety, and economic well being come from our own governments, not foreign ones. When we start using proportional force against internal threats, we can start talking about what proportional force against external threats is.
IOW, I'm a lot more scared of Goldman Sachs than I am scared of China.
Then they can get it from the rich, who are doing better today than they were in 2008. Those of us whose budgets are stretched already can't pay more in tax without cutting back purchases elsewhere. This will hurt the lower classes, and it will hurt the economy and the country as a whole.
So, you want to execute most, if not every, American head of state over the last 50 years*. You're a big fan of "peace" and "social justice" then? Maybe it's best that you don't have a say.
Yes, I'm in favor of executing most, if not every, American head of state over the last 50 years. And if I got my way, I'd still have less blood on my hands than any one of those presidents.
You don't address Reagan here, but I seem to recall you aren't a "fan," so I trust it would be, "Off with this head!" That leaves Jimmy Carter. Will you be taking his head as well... if only to complete the set? Collect them all?
Yes, Reagan made an arms deal with the Iranians. Giving aid and comfort to our enemies is the Constitutional definition of treason. Carter sold the arms that killed 200,000 East Timorese. That's not treason, but I can't see how supplying arms to a genocide isn't a war crime.
The fact that we never hold our leaders responsible for their crimes means that every president has no reason not to commit crimes. So they do. All of them. Start holding them accountable, and this will change.
Carter sold weapons to Indonesia while they were committing genocide in East Timor. Carter is complicit in the deaths of over 200,000 people, or a third of all Timorese.
So now soldiers are directly responsible for the deaths they cause in an illegal war? Don't you support our troops? Every time I try to make the argument that the troops are personally responsible for engaging in illegal wars, I get told that they are only doing their job, and it's the civilian leadership that is responsible. Which is it?
Blaming the troops is a lot like blaming the gun. Armies don't kill people, politicians kill people. The troops themselves are responsible for reducing themselves to "small movable forts and magazines, at the service of some unscrupulous man in power". But it's the unscrupulous man who is responsible for what is done with the weapon. Bush pulled the trigger on the Iraq war, he is responsible for the consequences.
I did not say I wanted to kill the president. I said it would be justice if the president were lawfully tried and executed for treason. If the Secret Service wants to pay me a visit for that, I would be more than happy to serve them tea.
No, those of you who think I'm being a partisan hack by singling out the worst war criminal of our time are being knee jerk partisan hacks. Obama has done many bad things, warrantless wiretapping, indefinite detention, violating the war powers act, etc. But none of those come close to causing hundreds of thousands of innocent people to die so your cronies get lucrative war contracts. Obama is a common criminal, Bush is directly responsible for more American deaths than Bin Laden. Get some perspective.
Sending thousands of Americans to die in a pointless war and causing hundreds of thousands of innocent deaths in the process is orders of magnitude worse than murdering a few.
Really? "Let us get away with war crimes or we'll go all Chavez on you" That's the best excuse you have? Is the rule of law simply not an option?
Changing presidents in the US is not regime change. We have the same constitution and the same body of laws. The military swears to defend the constitution against foreign and domestic enemies. And a treasonous president trying to illegally hold on to power is a domestic enemy. If we as a country were sensible to hold presidents accountable when they commit treason, we'd also have a military that is sensible enough to know that their allegiance is to the constitution and the rule of law, and not the president and the rule of man.
Is Bush Hitler? No. But he still has more blood on his hands than any free man should. He deserves to hang for his crimes.
Slashdot Mirror
Nobody cooks in naked cast iron. We use seasoned cast iron that has a protective layer of carbonized fat adhereing to it. I've made homemade tomato sauce in mine many times with no ill effects to either the dutch oven or the sauce.
Antibiotic abuse has the potential to kill many many more people than all the murderers in all of our prisons combined. We'd be safer letting the murderers out, and watching antibiotics like they are plutonium.
Unless you have people that can ABX the difference, no their criticisms are not scientifically founded. An actual blind test beats any theoretical reasoning any day.
44.1hkz 16bit audio is completely transparent to the human ear. No one has ever been able to detect when a 16bit DAC ADC pair has been placed in a 24/96 audio path.
Your preference for 24/96 audio as a listener is entirely due to the placebo effect. There are good reasons to master audio in high res, but for listening 16 bit 44.1khz audio is as good as anything.
No you can't. Not with any reasonably modern encoder and bitrates above 256. Anyone who tells you otherwise is experiencing the placbo effect. BTW, you can't tell the difference between 16bit/44.1khz audio and 24/96 audio either. And vinyl might sound "better" than digital to you, but digital is objectively more accurate.
Audiophilia is saturated with woo. This is the same market that brought us $500 ethernet cables.
At it's basic level cooking does not require much physical dexterity, but to expect a begineer to be able to follow instructions for the first time and get it right is like thinking a beginner can read a book on basketball and then make a shot for the first time. It is not a reasonable expectation.
Physical dexterity has to be learned. Like you say, there's no physical dexterity in cooking. So this isn't a valid analogy at all.
The reason some people think it is a reasonable expectation is that they have background
This just isn't true. My mom's a barely passable cook, and my dad was good, but I never watched him. Ever. After reaching adulthood, I ate meat with a side of veggies for several years. Then I decided I wanted to impress women, so I got on the internet found some recipes and followed them. To this day I can't think of anything where I followed the recipe exactly and didn't work. Today my girlfriend tells me I'm a much better cook than her, and it's entirely do to me reading and following instructions.
If one have never used a dutch oven to cook in the oven, then there is going to be no possibility of success.
I've never cooked with a dutch oven in the oven, but I've braised in other containers, and it's always worked. If you follow instructions, it works.
One would not expect a random person off the street to come in a code even 'hello world' in C simply from instructions
Why not? If I could pick up an Intro to C book and read it on my own, and do all the exercises, why wouldn't I expect anyone else to be able to do the same?
Yet everyone who can boil water and make Ramen noodles think they should be able to make a Soufflé.
Everyone who can boil water and make Ramen noodles should be able to make a souffle. All you need is good instructions and a brain.
If you can't drop it in a campfire, what good is it? I have a cast iron "dutch oven" without legs and no rim on the lid. I can't figure out what it's good for. I already have a slow cooker and an oven, so...?
Your loss, dutch ovens are awesome. It's a slow cooker AND an oven, that you can take camping. Although I would never recommend a porcelain one. Cast iron or nothing.
Why do they all think they're right? Because there's been a decades long propaganda war against opiates, and there hasn't been one against antibiotic abuse, which is far, far, far more dangerous. Let her complain, let them all complain. Their complaints aren't valid, and should in no way affect your employment.
If you prescribe an antibiotic for a virus, even once, you deserve to go to jail.
GPs in the UK get 8 minutes with each patient, they can't afford to spend it arguing with the patient
It takes less than a second to say "no". If I came in to your wife's office and demanded oxycodone, what would she do? Why shouldn't she do the same thing when a patient demands antibiotics?
Absolutely. Any physician who prescribes an antibiotic for a viral infection should lose his license immediately. And he should probably end up in jail. We are running out of antibiotics, and when we do, it's back to medieval life expectancy. Antibiotic abuse has the potential to kill millions of people.
IMO, every recreational drug should be legally available over the counter. But every antibiotic should be extremely closely monitored. Make people show up to a clinic for their antibiotics, the way methadone users have to today. If you don't show up to complete your course, you go to jail.
And ban the agricultural use of antibiotics. Factory farms where thousands of cows and chickens and pigs are kept in close quarters and fed antibiotics by the shovelful are nothing but petri dishes for the development of antibiotic resistance. Meat is not important enough to jeopardize one of the corner stones of modern medicine.
Michael Moore made more on his movie Fahrenheit 911 in the year it was released than Halliburton made in the same year on Iraqi contracts.
So Haliburton's stock going from $10 to over $40 today had nothing to do with it?
There is no basis for such a claim other than "I think W is evil".
Sounds a lot like the justification for the Iraq war, just s/W/Saddam/
Iraq is better off today than it was 10 years ago. The people are wealthier, live in a more stable society, and have far less violence. Chicago is actually a much more dangerous city than Baghdad, and it's less than 1/3 of the size. Try to refute these simple facts if you can.
And all it took was a few hundred thousand dead. Still doesn't make the Iraq war legal.
Bush went to war with a legal authorization from an elected congress
Preemptive war is illegal under the UN Charter, which as a properly ratified treaty, is supreme law of the land according to Article VI of the Constitution.
The US has ratified the UN charter which prohibits preemptive war. According to Article VI of the Constitution:
Violating a treaty is as illegal as violating an act of congress.
The biggest threats to our freedom, safety, and economic well being come from our own governments, not foreign ones. When we start using proportional force against internal threats, we can start talking about what proportional force against external threats is.
IOW, I'm a lot more scared of Goldman Sachs than I am scared of China.
And the government does need the money
Then they can get it from the rich, who are doing better today than they were in 2008. Those of us whose budgets are stretched already can't pay more in tax without cutting back purchases elsewhere. This will hurt the lower classes, and it will hurt the economy and the country as a whole.
The Iraq war.
So, you want to execute most, if not every, American head of state over the last 50 years*. You're a big fan of "peace" and "social justice" then? Maybe it's best that you don't have a say.
Yes, I'm in favor of executing most, if not every, American head of state over the last 50 years. And if I got my way, I'd still have less blood on my hands than any one of those presidents.
You don't address Reagan here, but I seem to recall you aren't a "fan," so I trust it would be, "Off with this head!" That leaves Jimmy Carter. Will you be taking his head as well... if only to complete the set? Collect them all?
Yes, Reagan made an arms deal with the Iranians. Giving aid and comfort to our enemies is the Constitutional definition of treason. Carter sold the arms that killed 200,000 East Timorese. That's not treason, but I can't see how supplying arms to a genocide isn't a war crime.
The fact that we never hold our leaders responsible for their crimes means that every president has no reason not to commit crimes. So they do. All of them. Start holding them accountable, and this will change.
Carter sold weapons to Indonesia while they were committing genocide in East Timor. Carter is complicit in the deaths of over 200,000 people, or a third of all Timorese.
So now soldiers are directly responsible for the deaths they cause in an illegal war? Don't you support our troops? Every time I try to make the argument that the troops are personally responsible for engaging in illegal wars, I get told that they are only doing their job, and it's the civilian leadership that is responsible. Which is it?
Blaming the troops is a lot like blaming the gun. Armies don't kill people, politicians kill people. The troops themselves are responsible for reducing themselves to "small movable forts and magazines, at the service of some unscrupulous man in power". But it's the unscrupulous man who is responsible for what is done with the weapon. Bush pulled the trigger on the Iraq war, he is responsible for the consequences.
I did not say I wanted to kill the president. I said it would be justice if the president were lawfully tried and executed for treason. If the Secret Service wants to pay me a visit for that, I would be more than happy to serve them tea.
I don't think most americans know 'petrol' isn't a generic word for fuel.
No, those of you who think I'm being a partisan hack by singling out the worst war criminal of our time are being knee jerk partisan hacks. Obama has done many bad things, warrantless wiretapping, indefinite detention, violating the war powers act, etc. But none of those come close to causing hundreds of thousands of innocent people to die so your cronies get lucrative war contracts. Obama is a common criminal, Bush is directly responsible for more American deaths than Bin Laden. Get some perspective.
Sending thousands of Americans to die in a pointless war and causing hundreds of thousands of innocent deaths in the process is orders of magnitude worse than murdering a few.
Really? "Let us get away with war crimes or we'll go all Chavez on you" That's the best excuse you have? Is the rule of law simply not an option?
Changing presidents in the US is not regime change. We have the same constitution and the same body of laws. The military swears to defend the constitution against foreign and domestic enemies. And a treasonous president trying to illegally hold on to power is a domestic enemy. If we as a country were sensible to hold presidents accountable when they commit treason, we'd also have a military that is sensible enough to know that their allegiance is to the constitution and the rule of law, and not the president and the rule of man.
Is Bush Hitler? No. But he still has more blood on his hands than any free man should. He deserves to hang for his crimes.