DNS is the weak point right now. Also global routing could do with better security, so that some Nigerian ISP's screw-up doesn't cause Australian traffic to be routed via Mongolia.
The US does business with worse countries than China. Does doing business with Saudi Arabia bring their values to America? Does using Israeli made CPUs (like many of Intel's parts) bring their culture to the US?
We have all the decentralised stuff already, but people don't want it. They could use BitTorrent for their videos, but they want the be on YouTube because that's where they get paid and that's where the communities are.
Same with distributed web sites on Tor, distributed social media etc.
Gmail, because it supports really good 2 factor auth. There is even an extra secure mode that blocks some normal Google account use and requires two FIDO keys.
Hotmail also supports 2 factor via a Microsoft account. Yahoo, I don't know.
The reason he brings in so much money even though he has fewer subscribers is that 4 year olds don't interact with YouTube like older children and adults do. They just keep watching video after autoplay video. Adults only watch exceptional videos more than once, 4 year olds love repetition.
Anti-political-correctness is fascism pretending to be a defence of free speech. It's supreme irony that for us to have free speech some people think that we have to ban criticism.
I've noticed that Slashdot has mellowed on this issue over time. I wonder if it's because we are all ageing and starting to realize that it really isn't that simple.
I think some of them just assume that anyone who criticises the US must hate America.
Well, the other bit of bad reasoning is that if anyone suggests anything that doesn't fit their preferred economic model or sounds vaguely socialist then they must also hate America.
The recommended intake for an adult male is 2500/day, or 2000 for a female. Much below that and it becomes difficult to get enough nutrition and maintain energy levels.
1500 is extremely low. I presume you have spoken to a nutritionist or your doctor before adopting such an aggressive diet. Do you use supplements?
I think it's worth explaining about starvation mode. It's not a medical term, it's the popular name for what happens when you reduce calorie intake. The body reacts by conserving energy, reducing the amount of energy it burns at rest, i.e. the amount it would use if you did nothing all day. This is accompanied by feeling tired and hungry.
As you can see the test group went from an average resting calorie burn of 2600/day to 1900/day. So a loss of 700 calories/day burned, or about 1.2 hours of vigorous exercise like fast cycling or jogging, before it even starts to have an effect on their weight.
And of course, they feel tried all the time and being obese have to be careful about not injuring themselves during exercise (jogging is probably a bad idea), and have to carefully plan meals. Few people have the time to do this, especially when they have to work and need to be reasonably awake to do so.
This is why the "just eat less, do some exercise" advice doesn't work.
If it really was that simple we wouldn't have the problems we have with obesity.
We could argue about where the problem lies, but it's pointless. Even if it is just people with no willpower and too lazy, how does knowing that help? We have tried shaming and berating, it doesn't work.
What does work is surgery, but that's drastic. This looks like a good option.
TL;DR the people studied lost weight but ended up in an unsustainable position, and put a lot of it back on. Not to mention the other health problems they suffered as a result.
It's not ideal for long term use, but as a way to lose weight it's very promising.
The reason why fat people find it so hard to lose weight and keep it off is that the body fights them. When they cut down their calorie intake it goes into starvation mode. They feel tried all the time and it reduces burn to a minimum, which ends up meaning they need to diet extremely aggressively to get anywhere and will likely be unable to keep the weight off. 1500 calories/day is neither healthy nor sustainable, but in starvation mode that's what they need to achieve.
This gene seems to fix that. Say it could be turned on and off at will, or perhaps turned off but then the body regulated with medication instead. People could maintain a healthy 2500 calories/day diet with all the nutrition they need, and still lose weight and then maintain at that level.
Solar PV will democratise power generation, moving power away from too-big-to-fail energy companies to individuals and communities. Big centralized energy generation is going away no matter what, the only question is now or later.
Slashdot Mirror
DNS is the weak point right now. Also global routing could do with better security, so that some Nigerian ISP's screw-up doesn't cause Australian traffic to be routed via Mongolia.
The US does business with worse countries than China. Does doing business with Saudi Arabia bring their values to America? Does using Israeli made CPUs (like many of Intel's parts) bring their culture to the US?
Before asking if the US can stop China, you should ask if it should stop China.
We have all the decentralised stuff already, but people don't want it. They could use BitTorrent for their videos, but they want the be on YouTube because that's where they get paid and that's where the communities are.
Same with distributed web sites on Tor, distributed social media etc.
Distribution is not the answer.
It doesn't justify the censorship I was complaining about. Glad you agree.
It's the silencing and censorship that is the problem.
Gmail, because it supports really good 2 factor auth. There is even an extra secure mode that blocks some normal Google account use and requires two FIDO keys.
Hotmail also supports 2 factor via a Microsoft account. Yahoo, I don't know.
Because someone was doxed it was probably best to wait until they had at least removed that information. Not point amplifying the doxing.
It wasn't author of the CoC's email address that was used for the DNS records, it was the site owner.
See, anti-political-correctness activist editors have to silence posts they disagree with. They must exert control, they can't help it.
Being honest or right is not a requirement of free speech.
You are not 4 years old, not the target audience.
The reason he brings in so much money even though he has fewer subscribers is that 4 year olds don't interact with YouTube like older children and adults do. They just keep watching video after autoplay video. Adults only watch exceptional videos more than once, 4 year olds love repetition.
Three out of four of those already exist.
Anti-political-correctness is fascism pretending to be a defence of free speech. It's supreme irony that for us to have free speech some people think that we have to ban criticism.
I've noticed that Slashdot has mellowed on this issue over time. I wonder if it's because we are all ageing and starting to realize that it really isn't that simple.
I think some of them just assume that anyone who criticises the US must hate America.
Well, the other bit of bad reasoning is that if anyone suggests anything that doesn't fit their preferred economic model or sounds vaguely socialist then they must also hate America.
It's almost as if everything you think you know about me is wrong.
The recommended intake for an adult male is 2500/day, or 2000 for a female. Much below that and it becomes difficult to get enough nutrition and maintain energy levels.
1500 is extremely low. I presume you have spoken to a nutritionist or your doctor before adopting such an aggressive diet. Do you use supplements?
I think it's worth explaining about starvation mode. It's not a medical term, it's the popular name for what happens when you reduce calorie intake. The body reacts by conserving energy, reducing the amount of energy it burns at rest, i.e. the amount it would use if you did nothing all day. This is accompanied by feeling tired and hungry.
This study and article about the study are very enlightening:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p...
https://www.scientificamerican...
As you can see the test group went from an average resting calorie burn of 2600/day to 1900/day. So a loss of 700 calories/day burned, or about 1.2 hours of vigorous exercise like fast cycling or jogging, before it even starts to have an effect on their weight.
And of course, they feel tried all the time and being obese have to be careful about not injuring themselves during exercise (jogging is probably a bad idea), and have to carefully plan meals. Few people have the time to do this, especially when they have to work and need to be reasonably awake to do so.
This is why the "just eat less, do some exercise" advice doesn't work.
If it really was that simple we wouldn't have the problems we have with obesity.
We could argue about where the problem lies, but it's pointless. Even if it is just people with no willpower and too lazy, how does knowing that help? We have tried shaming and berating, it doesn't work.
What does work is surgery, but that's drastic. This looks like a good option.
Here's an interesting study: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p...
A more readable write-up here: https://www.scientificamerican...
TL;DR the people studied lost weight but ended up in an unsustainable position, and put a lot of it back on. Not to mention the other health problems they suffered as a result.
It's not ideal for long term use, but as a way to lose weight it's very promising.
The reason why fat people find it so hard to lose weight and keep it off is that the body fights them. When they cut down their calorie intake it goes into starvation mode. They feel tried all the time and it reduces burn to a minimum, which ends up meaning they need to diet extremely aggressively to get anywhere and will likely be unable to keep the weight off. 1500 calories/day is neither healthy nor sustainable, but in starvation mode that's what they need to achieve.
This gene seems to fix that. Say it could be turned on and off at will, or perhaps turned off but then the body regulated with medication instead. People could maintain a healthy 2500 calories/day diet with all the nutrition they need, and still lose weight and then maintain at that level.
More likely she asked for privacy to save face and reduce the embarrassment to her family and company.
Sadly the "different culture = guilty" attitude is all too common.
That's an easy one to answer: Ice Cream Sandwich is in use by 0.3% of Android devices: https://developer.android.com/...
Solar PV will democratise power generation, moving power away from too-big-to-fail energy companies to individuals and communities. Big centralized energy generation is going away no matter what, the only question is now or later.