While most geeks might be against Can-SPAM, they don't seem to be against government intervention. So many replies to this article are about legal punishment.
What ever happened to the idea of the internet being self-regulated? Why are we crying to the government for help with what is largely a security hole in the SMTP protocol?. We are big boys (and girls), we can and should fix it ourselves.
We know SMTP is broken. No law will fix SMTP. If laws are required to stop spam, now is not the time to decide that. If after all of the technical fixes we can come up with are applied (and I am talking about things like SPF, not the well intentioned, but inherently flawed checksum solutions), and spam is still out of control, then it might make sense to ask the government for help.
Handing power over to the government is very premature (we haven't explored real technical fixes like SPF yet), invites abuse later, and doesn't even fix the problems we know we have to fix right now.
Geeks who want the government to fix the spam problem are just being irresponsible and unrealistic. They are fueled by anger and want revenge on the spammers. You won't get anywhere good when you are fueled by anger.
I agree. What I think is the worst about this situation is the aversion to technical fixes to the spam problem. Every time SPF is brought up, people boo it for not being the be-all end-all of spam prevention (and probably are too caught up in their anger of spammers, so prefer a legal fix anyway). No matter how good of a legal fix we get, we still need to fix SMTP! SMTP was not designed for use by the public. It lacks very basic security checks. Anybody can pretend to be anybody else. Laws will not fix this! We need to fix the protocol anyway, why not do it first, and then check out our legal options after that? We already know with 100% certainty that SMTP is insecure, and as a result aiding spammers.
If someone hacked my computer, I would certainly want to be able to take legal action against them. That would not be the first thing I would do though. The first thing I would do is plug the hole they used to get in in the first place. Why is SMTP any different?
I forgot to comment on this, but you should look at the price of dried beans and brown rice at the supermarket. Cooking with beans and rice is not only extremely cheap, it is a "complete protien source" (more hype, but some people like it). It also has complex carbohydrates (which will give you sustained energy), fiber (because nobody likes to be constipated), and plenty of calcium along with other minerals and nutrients we don't completely understand (this is common with many if not most vegetables, we just have a lot to learn still). Seems to have meat and dairy beat both in price and nutrition.
Some fruit or fruit juice in addition to that will give you simple carbs if you think you need them for the workout.
My definition of healthy is basically a lack of sickness. Good energy after a reasonable amount of sleep. I think you hit the nail on the head by naming people you think are sexy. You think people with a lot of muscle are sexy, but the truth is everyone has a different idea of sexy. If the vegans you see don't have girlfriends as often as meat eaters, you may have a point:)
My comment about bulking up was only meant to point out that what you are saying won't apply to a lot of the readers.
You probably don't see many vegetarian bodybuilders because you don't see many vegetarians, and because people have been brainwashed into thinking you need to eat lots of meat to do it. Just how much muscle do you think you are building in one day? And how much muscle tissue are you eating? Seems excessive to me.
I think soy is overhyped just like calcium is. Tofu and soy milk are just more processed food in my opinion. I prefer whole foods like beans, grains, and fresh fruits and vegetables. A little soy here and there isn't going to kill you, but whats the point? It is not the magic bullet people like to pretend it is. I said what the healthy alternatives were though. Vegetable oils like hemp and flax are very rich sources of essential fatty acids, and regular vegetable oils have them in good amounts too. Even spinach which isn't thought of as having fats in it is a good source. It is all around, you don't need to look to animal sources for it, and I think you will be better off that way.
Someone not looking healthy and not being healthy can be two very different things. When the general population is becoming increasingly overweight, healthy thin people may look unhealthy to you.
Soy phyto-estrogens are poorly understood, some think they are a weak estrogen and others think they actually block estrogen. It is obvious you are getting carried away with yourself when you say "Nice breasts, dude." Why you keep getting moderated up is a mystery to me.
Next you say dairy products are good for "bulking up", of course there are healthier ways to gain weight but I won't even get into that. Obecity related illnesses are America's #2 killer behind cigarettes. Most people don't need to bulk up.
While the article does not say to avoid calcium suppliments, it puts them at the end of the section of calcium sources (after 3 paragraphs) in one sentence, right before milk which they warn against. The focus is on green leafy vegetables and beans. The women in the study didn't use suppliments at all though, so I don't know where you got that from.
You seem to be mixing two points together when you say "According to their study, there is an increased risk of fracture with increased calcium intake, not just milk intake."
Actually the study found that higher intakes of calcium from milk or other sources didn't by itself decrease fractures. The article I linked to before suggests exercise to reduce fractures. The other half of what was mixed into your statement (the actual increase of fractures) they claimed to be due to milk, again in-line with the article.
Even if dietary cholesterol has no effect at all on your total cholesterol, it makes no difference. The dietary sources of cholesterol themselves (meat/dairy) are unhealthy for many reasons and have healthy alternatives, and cholesterol can be synthesized by the body when needed. Yes, essential fatty acids are necessary, but cholesterol is not one of them. They are linoleic acid and a-linolenic acid. You can get them in decent amounts without worrying about cholesterol like you said, but the idea that milk or other animal products is a good source for them is ridiculous. Vegetable oils are rich in essential fatty acids, especially but not exclusively hemp and flax oils.
It would be nice if you linked to web pages since I don't go to the library often, but I don't see why it matters if one study found that meat can increase calcium absorption in the intestines when most find that the net effect of animal protien in the diet results in more calcium loss. So you absorb more in the intestines just to pee it out later, is that basically what they said?
Overall I think calcium is overhyped. Cows, horses, elephants, and so many other animals get enough by just eating grass. There is no reason a varied plant based diet in a human would be insufficient. Quoting the article I linked to originally, "American recommendations for calcium intake are high, partly because the meat, salt, tobacco, and physical inactivity of American life leads to overly rapid and unnatural loss of calcium through the kidneys." There really is no need to take calcium suppliments or even worry about calcium as long as you take care of yourself.
Given the choice between a 12 year Harvard study of 78,000 women VS the superstitions of "Old-school bodybuilders", I prefer to believe in one more than the other.
Saturated fats are needed by the body, but in amounts way below the amounts in milk, and in combination with healthier fats lacking in milk. Cholesterol is produced by the body when needed, so none in the diet is best.
The bigger problem is that milk is only for babies. When a lactose intolerant adult drinks milk, they get sick, and their intestines become lined with mucous to prevent the absorption of it. A lot of nutrition is lost because of this, including calcium. If you are lactose tolerant, you dont get sick, but you do get the mucous effect. In addition to this, the protien in the milk causes you to lose calcium already in your bones, just like any other type of animal protien.
You can find information about this on plenty of sites other than vegetarian/animal rights sites if you are worried about bias, just do a google search.
shift click this link for the 2.2.14 patch. I am using it right now, works great. I havent modded the controller yet, so all i am saying is it supports the non-raid udma66 controller, but im not sure why it wouldent support it in raid mode if it is after all the same card.
All that they want is a battle. They want people to get mad, they want people to try to stop them. Quit playing thier game. If someone walked up to you and said "you are wearing a blue shirt, you are stupid!", you would not take them seriously. Obviously wearing a blue shirt does not make you stupid. Why then, do you take these people seriously? If you know deep down that they don't make sense, that you just can't take someone like that seriously, it will show without you trying. The next time someone says something racist, laugh. Tell them that you laughed because it was so stupid, it was stupid was it? It wasn't something to get offended about was it? Of course not. Just like the person who said that you are stupid for wearing a blue shirt. It just didn't make sense, there was nothing to get mad about.
Joliet is just an ISO extension, and it only exists because microsoft didnt want to use what was already out there, rockridge. I dont see any advantages to using joliet, but i have noticed it doesnt like characters like : and ? in filenames.
if she saw the southpark movie she would know that her son needs a mother, not a fighter. of course she didnt actually watch the show or movie, after all it is popular (among the monkey-see-monkey-do "mature" adult society) to hate it, so why bother?
After all who really wants to be just "another brick in the wall." I am propably going too far with this, but im wondering why you are saying it that way. Read the poem above, it seems like the people picking on that person were bricks in the wall. Also, maybe the people who pick on others, and try to be the same, just use this as thier own wall. If anyone is interested in talking about this stuff contact me (through efnet irc). There is so much in the wall that explains what happened here.
This whole story makes me think about the pink floyd movie the wall alot. The poem up there is a perfect example. They have built up thier wall and are now "comfortably numb". The problem isnt the geeks are listening to the wrong music, everyone else is, they would have realised this would happen if they listened to pink floyd:)
I checked slashdot twice within a few minutes, and this one just popped up. I read the article and reloaded and your comment was here. Yeah you could have read it but i doubt it. Anyways, change what you cannot accept? We cannot accept this. Accept what you cannot change? This can be changed, don't expect it to happen the week after the media finally tells people the real reason (if they even tell them, since we know they wont get it on thier own). You just seem to negative about this...oh well.
Slashdot Mirror
What ever happened to the idea of the internet being self-regulated? Why are we crying to the government for help with what is largely a security hole in the SMTP protocol?. We are big boys (and girls), we can and should fix it ourselves.
We know SMTP is broken. No law will fix SMTP. If laws are required to stop spam, now is not the time to decide that. If after all of the technical fixes we can come up with are applied (and I am talking about things like SPF, not the well intentioned, but inherently flawed checksum solutions), and spam is still out of control, then it might make sense to ask the government for help.
Handing power over to the government is very premature (we haven't explored real technical fixes like SPF yet), invites abuse later, and doesn't even fix the problems we know we have to fix right now.
Geeks who want the government to fix the spam problem are just being irresponsible and unrealistic. They are fueled by anger and want revenge on the spammers. You won't get anywhere good when you are fueled by anger.
If someone hacked my computer, I would certainly want to be able to take legal action against them. That would not be the first thing I would do though. The first thing I would do is plug the hole they used to get in in the first place. Why is SMTP any different?
Some fruit or fruit juice in addition to that will give you simple carbs if you think you need them for the workout.
My comment about bulking up was only meant to point out that what you are saying won't apply to a lot of the readers.
I think soy is overhyped just like calcium is. Tofu and soy milk are just more processed food in my opinion. I prefer whole foods like beans, grains, and fresh fruits and vegetables. A little soy here and there isn't going to kill you, but whats the point? It is not the magic bullet people like to pretend it is. I said what the healthy alternatives were though. Vegetable oils like hemp and flax are very rich sources of essential fatty acids, and regular vegetable oils have them in good amounts too. Even spinach which isn't thought of as having fats in it is a good source. It is all around, you don't need to look to animal sources for it, and I think you will be better off that way.
Soy phyto-estrogens are poorly understood, some think they are a weak estrogen and others think they actually block estrogen. It is obvious you are getting carried away with yourself when you say "Nice breasts, dude." Why you keep getting moderated up is a mystery to me.
Next you say dairy products are good for "bulking up", of course there are healthier ways to gain weight but I won't even get into that. Obecity related illnesses are America's #2 killer behind cigarettes. Most people don't need to bulk up.
You seem to be mixing two points together when you say "According to their study, there is an increased risk of fracture with increased calcium intake, not just milk intake."
Actually the study found that higher intakes of calcium from milk or other sources didn't by itself decrease fractures. The article I linked to before suggests exercise to reduce fractures. The other half of what was mixed into your statement (the actual increase of fractures) they claimed to be due to milk, again in-line with the article.
Uh huh. Now pick out which site in the search results you think is unbiased and read it.
It would be nice if you linked to web pages since I don't go to the library often, but I don't see why it matters if one study found that meat can increase calcium absorption in the intestines when most find that the net effect of animal protien in the diet results in more calcium loss. So you absorb more in the intestines just to pee it out later, is that basically what they said?
Overall I think calcium is overhyped. Cows, horses, elephants, and so many other animals get enough by just eating grass. There is no reason a varied plant based diet in a human would be insufficient. Quoting the article I linked to originally, "American recommendations for calcium intake are high, partly because the meat, salt, tobacco, and physical inactivity of American life leads to overly rapid and unnatural loss of calcium through the kidneys." There really is no need to take calcium suppliments or even worry about calcium as long as you take care of yourself.
Saturated fats are needed by the body, but in amounts way below the amounts in milk, and in combination with healthier fats lacking in milk. Cholesterol is produced by the body when needed, so none in the diet is best.
The bigger problem is that milk is only for babies. When a lactose intolerant adult drinks milk, they get sick, and their intestines become lined with mucous to prevent the absorption of it. A lot of nutrition is lost because of this, including calcium. If you are lactose tolerant, you dont get sick, but you do get the mucous effect. In addition to this, the protien in the milk causes you to lose calcium already in your bones, just like any other type of animal protien.
You can find information about this on plenty of sites other than vegetarian/animal rights sites if you are worried about bias, just do a google search.
Nope. I enjoy my health too much to destroy it with one of the most bland types of junk food in existence.
shift click this link for the 2.2.14 patch. I am using it right now, works great. I havent modded the controller yet, so all i am saying is it supports the non-raid udma66 controller, but im not sure why it wouldent support it in raid mode if it is after all the same card.
All that they want is a battle. They want people to get mad, they want people to try to stop them. Quit playing thier game. If someone walked up to you and said "you are wearing a blue shirt, you are stupid!", you would not take them seriously. Obviously wearing a blue shirt does not make you stupid. Why then, do you take these people seriously? If you know deep down that they don't make sense, that you just can't take someone like that seriously, it will show without you trying. The next time someone says something racist, laugh. Tell them that you laughed because it was so stupid, it was stupid was it? It wasn't something to get offended about was it? Of course not. Just like the person who said that you are stupid for wearing a blue shirt. It just didn't make sense, there was nothing to get mad about.
Joliet is just an ISO extension, and it only exists because microsoft didnt want to use what was already out there, rockridge. I dont see any advantages to using joliet, but i have noticed it doesnt like characters like : and ? in filenames.
if she saw the southpark movie she would know that her son needs a mother, not a fighter. of course she didnt actually watch the show or movie, after all it is popular (among the monkey-see-monkey-do "mature" adult society) to hate it, so why bother?
Maybe it will be IBM again :(
After all who really wants to be just "another brick in the wall."
I am propably going too far with this, but im wondering why you are saying it that way. Read the poem above, it seems like the people picking on that person were bricks in the wall. Also, maybe the people who pick on others, and try to be the same, just use this as thier own wall. If anyone is interested in talking about this stuff contact me (through efnet irc). There is so much in the wall that explains what happened here.
This whole story makes me think about the pink floyd movie the wall alot. The poem up there is a perfect example. They have built up thier wall and are now "comfortably numb". The problem isnt the geeks are listening to the wrong music, everyone else is, they would have realised this would happen if they listened to pink floyd :)
I checked slashdot twice within a few minutes, and this one just popped up. I read the article and reloaded and your comment was here. Yeah you could have read it but i doubt it. Anyways, change what you cannot accept? We cannot accept this. Accept what you cannot change? This can be changed, don't expect it to happen the week after the media finally tells people the real reason (if they even tell them, since we know they wont get it on thier own). You just seem to negative about this...oh well.