Seattle's taxpayers have to be the most stupid motherfuckers on Earth.
Seattle consistently ranks in the top three US cities on a whole host of criteria, and has the second-highest percentage of the population with graduate degrees (after San Francisco), so probably not exactly the stupidest motherfuckers on Earth.
Have you ever been to San Antonio, Orlando, Louisville or Tampa?
I've been to all those places. San Antonio was a ring of decay surrounding a river themed tourist trap. Orlando is Disney. Enough said. Louisville. When I asked the concierge for a vegetarian restaurant (I was traveling with an Indian colleague) he suggested the steak house across the road. Tampa? Would you like some murder with your excess humidity?
Seattle isn't Portland. But it's a place I wouldn't mind living.
Seattle's taxpayers have to be the most stupid motherfuckers on Earth.
Seattle consistently ranks in the top three US cities on a whole host of criteria, and has the second-highest percentage of the population with graduate degrees (after San Francisco), so probably not exactly the stupidest motherfuckers on Earth.
Have you ever been to San Antonio, Orlando, Louisville or Tampa?
But the traffic sucks. They should build a tunnel or something.
So the problem is that people swap their Australian SIMs when they go abroad, and don't get alerts. Okay, well why not just send an email saying "you have an alert, log in to see it out replace your Australian SIM and pay $$$ to get the text message"?
That's what the lottery in the UK does. You get a message saying you have good news, log in to see it. Then you find out you won £2.37 and it was barely worth the effort.
The problem is that carriers gouge people who are traveling abroad if they have the temerity to turn on their phone with the home SIM installed. I quote from the text message to my phone when I landed in Canada on a flight from Hong Kong, on my way to the US.. "AT&T Free Msg: Welcome abroad! Please note your current international rates are: data $2.05/MB, talk $1.00/min, text $0.50/msg sent; $1.30/photo or video msg sent. Reply YES to learn how to get lower rates. For questions, or to block data, call +1.214.547.2300 (a free call from this phone)."
Sure, it's a the new way to make money in America. Send your child with a fake bomb, then sue for millions. Why labor at a job when you can just take money from the community.
If you failed to notice, there was no bomb, fake or otherwise. It was a backpack with a built in phone charger.
The reason for a suit is the arrest and detention of a minor, which for all the excuses thrown around, was because the kid wore a headdress and was probably darker skinned than your average caucasian.
According to evolution, grass would evolve to not be eaten faster than a cow's ability to evolve to eat it. Grass has much higher/faster generational turnover than cows.
Too bad the theory's a piece of shit.
Grass doesn't die when it's eaten. It's the same reason we can mow it and the lawn doesn't die. Don't give up your day job at church. You don't seem cut out for science.
The simple fact is that if animals weren't meant to be eaten, then they wouldn't have been made out of food. Besides, there is plenty of evidence that shows that animals are, in fact, delicious.
Actually, the opposite.
We're meant to eat meat.
If we weren't meant to eat meat, we wouldn't have these teeth called canines - meant for tearing meat, nor would we need to eat meat to get all the nutrition we need to survive. Furthermore, we wouldn't have stereoscopic vision with a relatively limited field of view - which isn't useful for a herbivore. Their food doesn't move so depth perception isn't needed, but a wider field of view is a great tool for spotting predators. Why would you give up that wider field of view if there wasn't something to be gained - like being able to quickly determine how far away your moving dinner is?
Well we certainly adapted to eat meat. But also plants. Not grains though. They're new. They came with agriculture and we aren't adapted to them at all. The Western metabolic disorder thing is a specific problem that makes plants a problem. But there are whole populations that get by on mostly plants, mostly meat and fully omnivorous diets and they do fine.
Any scientific analysis of "This diet is the right one for humans" falls down because there is always a counterexample. We can point to the Western diet and safely say "This diet is not the right one for a substantial fraction of humans".
One of my favorite Shoe comics has Shoe telling the waitress he doesn't want any vegetables with his steak because "vegetables is what food eats."
The truth is, if vegetables were meant to be eaten, they wouldn't be made out of carbohydrates.
I do that every now and then (well not the "vegetables is what food eats" thing) but I try to get them to deliver the meat without the vegetables. I won't be eating them anyway. I found a restaurant in the outskirts of D.C. that managed it one night, but not the next. Most places just can't handle it and feel compelled to add vegetables to the plate.
The simple fact is that if animals weren't meant to be eaten, then they wouldn't have been made out of food. Besides, there is plenty of evidence that shows that animals are, in fact, delicious.
If humans weren't made for eating, then why are they made of meat?
Nothing is made for anything. There isn't a purpose to life. Life happens mostly through natural selection, although humans have been pretty good at directed selection over the past few thousand years.
"If I feed an animal 2000 corns/kg over its lifetime...
... then your greatest accomplishment is clearly having created a new unit of measurement, to wit,corns/kg.
I assume we're talking about cows. Don't feed them corn. Let them eat the grass they evolved to eat. They'll be happier and the meat will taste better.
I'm probably supposed to make a slashdot cows reference here. I won't.
Actually, most of the animal is edible. Other than the outer covering and the hard skeletal part, it is all good, and as mentioned before, delicious. The long bones are especially nutritious once you crack them and extract the gooey greasy insides. As for cooking them, that is very much optional, yes, even for humans. For a civilized example, see beef tartar, sushi, sashimi. Insects too are animals and they are quite nutritious though arguably less delicious.
Cut or crack the bones. Boil them slowly over many hours. Then reduce the water until there's none left. What's left is the fat from inside the bones and the gelatinous stuff leached out of the bones. Add salt. Tastes awesome. Or you can cook more stuff in it. The hard skeletal part is great, it just takes time to make it edible.
I haven't cracked the insect thing yet. But that's just Western conditioning. I cracked snails, sashimi, raw meat and most of the other things many Westerners are squeamish about (and I used to be) by putting them in my mouth and finding out how tasty they were. If the occasion arises, I'll try an insect.
You're ignoring the debunker's point, which is that meat-eaters don't just eat bacon...
I would, if my wife would let me.
I, for one, am willing to accept this study's results at face value.
I'm going to go and cook some bacon right now. Nice and wobbly. I blame slashdot. It's good that it's mostly saturated fat, and so it won't promote cholesterol oxidation leading to heart disease and cancer, but will help lower my LDL and increase my HDL, unlike lettuce. Don't listen to the vegetarians. They're scientifically naive.
the reasonable reader could infer that they were talking about aesthetics. you, on the other hand, are quite unreasonable.
clearly they didn't mean 'it will physically block our roads and we will be trapped!'
again, i ask: how many solar farms surround YOUR town? would you like it if one was erected literally 50ft (from the article) from your house? maybe you wouldn't mind, but are you saying it's unreasonable for these people to feel that way? fuck you.
I don't have a solar farm nearby. But I do have a large semiconductor factory directly North of my house. It's not 50ft. More like 200ft. In some sense it blocks my Northwards passage. But not really. I can walk and drive around it. It seems to substantially improve the value of my house because people like to live near where they work. To my East, West and South, there are houses and other buildings. I can't pass through them either. Yet I am not trapped. They used the word trapped in their justification. If they have an aesthetic concern, they didn't mention it.
I don't agree, but they are certainly entitled to their opinion, and if they want to block a FOURTH solar farm from being built around their two horse town, I really don't think we have any room to bitch.
How many solar farms does YOUR town have? less than 3 per 800 people, I imagine.
A fourth solar farm doesn't block the town in any more than the existing fields on which the solar farms are built on block the town in. It's the roads between the fields than enable access.
It's a specious reason invented after the fact to try and make them not look small minded.
Slashdot Mirror
Seattle consistently ranks in the top three US cities on a whole host of criteria, and has the second-highest percentage of the population with graduate degrees (after San Francisco), so probably not exactly the stupidest motherfuckers on Earth.
Have you ever been to San Antonio, Orlando, Louisville or Tampa?
I've been to all those places.
San Antonio was a ring of decay surrounding a river themed tourist trap.
Orlando is Disney. Enough said.
Louisville. When I asked the concierge for a vegetarian restaurant (I was traveling with an Indian colleague) he suggested the steak house across the road.
Tampa? Would you like some murder with your excess humidity?
Seattle isn't Portland. But it's a place I wouldn't mind living.
Seattle consistently ranks in the top three US cities on a whole host of criteria, and has the second-highest percentage of the population with graduate degrees (after San Francisco), so probably not exactly the stupidest motherfuckers on Earth.
Have you ever been to San Antonio, Orlando, Louisville or Tampa?
But the traffic sucks. They should build a tunnel or something.
>worthless municipal make-work projects
If any city needed a tunnel, Seattle is it. It is far from worthless.
So the problem is that people swap their Australian SIMs when they go abroad, and don't get alerts. Okay, well why not just send an email saying "you have an alert, log in to see it out replace your Australian SIM and pay $$$ to get the text message"?
That's what the lottery in the UK does. You get a message saying you have good news, log in to see it. Then you find out you won £2.37 and it was barely worth the effort.
The problem is that carriers gouge people who are traveling abroad if they have the temerity to turn on their phone with the home SIM installed.
I quote from the text message to my phone when I landed in Canada on a flight from Hong Kong, on my way to the US..
"AT&T Free Msg:
Welcome abroad! Please note your current international rates are: data $2.05/MB, talk $1.00/min, text $0.50/msg sent; $1.30/photo or video msg sent. Reply YES to learn how to get lower rates. For questions, or to block data, call +1.214.547.2300 (a free call from this phone)."
Yes over 2 dollars per megabyte. I shit you not.
I have seen MM notation many times in publications.
But none of them were the specification for the IS standard for units.
For what it's worth.. 1MM is apparently common in financial services for 1 million.
Bizarre. You only need one M to denote a million of something.
Sure, it's a the new way to make money in America. Send your child with a fake bomb, then sue for millions. Why labor at a job when you can just take money from the community.
If you failed to notice, there was no bomb, fake or otherwise. It was a backpack with a built in phone charger.
The reason for a suit is the arrest and detention of a minor, which for all the excuses thrown around, was because the kid wore a headdress and was probably darker skinned than your average caucasian.
Actually, I'm pretty sure it does constitute a falsified bomb threat/scare. (ianal)
Were you there? I doubt it.
False arrest? The kid lied and said it was a bomb. No false anything there except for a bomb threat.
It was a false bomb accusation. Not a false bomb threat.
Take them for all the money that can be had. False arrest charges would be nice too.
What is wrong with bags with wheels?
Wheels are a symbol of science, engineering and progress. If you have wheels you are siding with the subversives.
evolved to eat
According to evolution, grass would evolve to not be eaten faster than a cow's ability to evolve to eat it. Grass has much higher/faster generational turnover than cows.
Too bad the theory's a piece of shit.
Grass doesn't die when it's eaten. It's the same reason we can mow it and the lawn doesn't die.
Don't give up your day job at church. You don't seem cut out for science.
I've been living under the impression that all phone and internet traffic is at least logged and probably monitored.
That some details of the operations come out from time to time doesn't alter the basic idea that this is what governments do.
Did anyone think differently in recent years?
The simple fact is that if animals weren't meant to be eaten, then they wouldn't have been made out of food. Besides, there is plenty of evidence that shows that animals are, in fact, delicious.
Actually, the opposite.
We're meant to eat meat.
If we weren't meant to eat meat, we wouldn't have these teeth called canines - meant for tearing meat, nor would we need to eat meat to get all the nutrition we need to survive. Furthermore, we wouldn't have stereoscopic vision with a relatively limited field of view - which isn't useful for a herbivore. Their food doesn't move so depth perception isn't needed, but a wider field of view is a great tool for spotting predators. Why would you give up that wider field of view if there wasn't something to be gained - like being able to quickly determine how far away your moving dinner is?
Well we certainly adapted to eat meat. But also plants. Not grains though. They're new. They came with agriculture and we aren't adapted to them at all.
The Western metabolic disorder thing is a specific problem that makes plants a problem. But there are whole populations that get by on mostly plants, mostly meat and fully omnivorous diets and they do fine.
Any scientific analysis of "This diet is the right one for humans" falls down because there is always a counterexample. We can point to the Western diet and safely say "This diet is not the right one for a substantial fraction of humans".
I don't know about you, but I actually like the occasional carbohydrate.
So do I. But they make me fatter.
One of my favorite Shoe comics has Shoe telling the waitress he doesn't want any vegetables with his steak because "vegetables is what food eats."
The truth is, if vegetables were meant to be eaten, they wouldn't be made out of carbohydrates.
I do that every now and then (well not the "vegetables is what food eats" thing) but I try to get them to deliver the meat without the vegetables. I won't be eating them anyway. I found a restaurant in the outskirts of D.C. that managed it one night, but not the next. Most places just can't handle it and feel compelled to add vegetables to the plate.
The simple fact is that if animals weren't meant to be eaten, then they wouldn't have been made out of food. Besides, there is plenty of evidence that shows that animals are, in fact, delicious.
If humans weren't made for eating, then why are they made of meat?
Nothing is made for anything. There isn't a purpose to life. Life happens mostly through natural selection, although humans have been pretty good at directed selection over the past few thousand years.
You're going to have to trim off a lot of fat.
Render it you insensitive clod.
... then your greatest accomplishment is clearly having created a new unit of measurement, to wit,corns/kg.
I assume we're talking about cows.
Don't feed them corn. Let them eat the grass they evolved to eat. They'll be happier and the meat will taste better.
I'm probably supposed to make a slashdot cows reference here. I won't.
Actually, most of the animal is edible. Other than the outer covering and the hard skeletal part, it is all good, and as mentioned before, delicious. The long bones are especially nutritious once you crack them and extract the gooey greasy insides. As for cooking them, that is very much optional, yes, even for humans. For a civilized example, see beef tartar, sushi, sashimi. Insects too are animals and they are quite nutritious though arguably less delicious.
Cut or crack the bones. Boil them slowly over many hours. Then reduce the water until there's none left. What's left is the fat from inside the bones and the gelatinous stuff leached out of the bones. Add salt. Tastes awesome. Or you can cook more stuff in it. The hard skeletal part is great, it just takes time to make it edible.
I haven't cracked the insect thing yet. But that's just Western conditioning. I cracked snails, sashimi, raw meat and most of the other things many Westerners are squeamish about (and I used to be) by putting them in my mouth and finding out how tasty they were. If the occasion arises, I'll try an insect.
You're ignoring the debunker's point, which is that meat-eaters don't just eat bacon...
I would, if my wife would let me.
I, for one, am willing to accept this study's results at face value.
I'm going to go and cook some bacon right now. Nice and wobbly. I blame slashdot.
It's good that it's mostly saturated fat, and so it won't promote cholesterol oxidation leading to heart disease and cancer, but will help lower my LDL and increase my HDL, unlike lettuce. Don't listen to the vegetarians. They're scientifically naive.
It's not 0 when I sautee them in butter and eat them with bacon.
xyzzy
the reasonable reader could infer that they were talking about aesthetics. you, on the other hand, are quite unreasonable.
clearly they didn't mean 'it will physically block our roads and we will be trapped!'
again, i ask: how many solar farms surround YOUR town? would you like it if one was erected literally 50ft (from the article) from your house? maybe you wouldn't mind, but are you saying it's unreasonable for these people to feel that way? fuck you.
I don't have a solar farm nearby. But I do have a large semiconductor factory directly North of my house. It's not 50ft. More like 200ft. In some sense it blocks my Northwards passage. But not really. I can walk and drive around it. It seems to substantially improve the value of my house because people like to live near where they work. To my East, West and South, there are houses and other buildings. I can't pass through them either. Yet I am not trapped. They used the word trapped in their justification. If they have an aesthetic concern, they didn't mention it.
I don't agree, but they are certainly entitled to their opinion, and if they want to block a FOURTH solar farm from being built around their two horse town, I really don't think we have any room to bitch.
How many solar farms does YOUR town have? less than 3 per 800 people, I imagine.
A fourth solar farm doesn't block the town in any more than the existing fields on which the solar farms are built on block the town in. It's the roads between the fields than enable access.
It's a specious reason invented after the fact to try and make them not look small minded.