For most people living in first world countries, home heating and cooling contribute a great deal more to their carbon footprint than the meat in their diet.
Plain rice is a lot more economical per calorie than prepared foods. So is pasta. This at least suggests that the prepared foods are being chosen on more than a purely economic basis.
$5 gin is cheaper and lower calorie per drink than beer. So are $5 whiskey and $5 vodka. And $5 tequila.
I doubt that poor people end up driving more than middle class people. I doubt it a lot, gas costs quite a bit of money. Cite some statistics if you are going to continue claiming this.
Until someone proves that most people are fat for fundamental biological reasons, rather than because they consume excess calories on a regular basis, chalking it up to eating excess calories is a perfectly reasonable thing to do, as it lines up nicely with the laws of thermodynamics.
I guess it isn't very nice to point out that fat people who consume more resources are consuming more resources in part because they are fat, but I don't think it is quite a "hate crime".
There is probably also a grandfather effect, where being backed up by the productivity of a male working into his 60's makes you better off than you would be without such.
I think most people have encountered this phenomenon. I don't really think the remote is the problem though, it is the multiple devices. If you (not you, them) think of everything as a channel instead of a channel on a specific device, you aren't going to do a very good job of remembering how to switch to a given channel (because it then becomes "how do I get to that channel" instead of "how do I get to that channel on that device", which is easy).
The solution is a tuner that presents a list of channels that are available and has the smarts to switch among the devices to get to each channel.
Rock can compress. I imagine that the effect is relatively easily observed when you are considering the compression over several miles of thickness. The article says little to nothing about what exactly they observed, so it's hard to say if the comparison is obviously wrong or not.
It isn't just replacing the ligament with a stronger one, there are holes drilled in the bones and the ligament is threaded through them and used to hold the bones together.
There is a financial incentive to provide drugs. There is a financial incentive to create and push out malware. That's the analog I was using, because it's the financial incentive that drives both drug dealers and malwarers to do what they do.
The FBI could go to work in the US, but they probably wouldn't get much done outside of the country.
Name the last time the United States went to war with somebody with anti-satellite technology. When you are fighting an asymmetric battle, it is plenty useful.
It's "only" $125 million a year if you average it over the 8 years. So they "only" have $100 million to spend on whatever after they pay for the new hires.
It isn't all that ridiculous if you figure that they are pushing a good deal of the funds out to the state level and so forth.
Slashdot Mirror
For most people living in first world countries, home heating and cooling contribute a great deal more to their carbon footprint than the meat in their diet.
I can't believe it would be nearly as delicious as bacon from a pig. I mean, I'm pretty sure that a big part of the purpose of a pig is to get eaten.
Miller time? I don't think you are a real Canuck.
Also, a few beers?
Plain rice is a lot more economical per calorie than prepared foods. So is pasta. This at least suggests that the prepared foods are being chosen on more than a purely economic basis.
$5 gin is cheaper and lower calorie per drink than beer. So are $5 whiskey and $5 vodka. And $5 tequila.
I doubt that poor people end up driving more than middle class people. I doubt it a lot, gas costs quite a bit of money. Cite some statistics if you are going to continue claiming this.
Until someone proves that most people are fat for fundamental biological reasons, rather than because they consume excess calories on a regular basis, chalking it up to eating excess calories is a perfectly reasonable thing to do, as it lines up nicely with the laws of thermodynamics.
I guess it isn't very nice to point out that fat people who consume more resources are consuming more resources in part because they are fat, but I don't think it is quite a "hate crime".
Corn is 'popular' as an alternative fuel because there is a giant government mandate to use ethanol in the US, with happy-fun-time subsidies.
Get rid of the mandate, and the *stampede* to get in on the gub'ment money would rapidly end.
They'll still eventually rot, so the carbon isn't sequestered particularly well.
Batteries are approximately as recyclable as hydrogen.
6 feet, 205 pounds is considered moderately overweight on the BMI scale. For someone 6 feet tall, obese starts in at 220 pounds.
There is probably also a grandfather effect, where being backed up by the productivity of a male working into his 60's makes you better off than you would be without such.
I think most people have encountered this phenomenon. I don't really think the remote is the problem though, it is the multiple devices. If you (not you, them) think of everything as a channel instead of a channel on a specific device, you aren't going to do a very good job of remembering how to switch to a given channel (because it then becomes "how do I get to that channel" instead of "how do I get to that channel on that device", which is easy).
The solution is a tuner that presents a list of channels that are available and has the smarts to switch among the devices to get to each channel.
The specifics might be up in the air, but the spending is still many times th cosmetics statement:
http://www.military.com/NewsContent/0,13319,161398,00.html
(that's what they are asking for, not current spending, I'm sure current spending is within 50% of those figures)
So it makes things cooler?
Rock can compress. I imagine that the effect is relatively easily observed when you are considering the compression over several miles of thickness. The article says little to nothing about what exactly they observed, so it's hard to say if the comparison is obviously wrong or not.
what are the chances that the space scientists accounted for the differences?
/. posts for someone to think of it, so that puts it what, 99.99999999999999%?
It took 10
A person with a given genetic profile, at a given level of fitness, will have a maximum biomechanical efficiency. His is higher than non-amputees.
It isn't just replacing the ligament with a stronger one, there are holes drilled in the bones and the ligament is threaded through them and used to hold the bones together.
You would want to take the proper amount to not overstimulate your body, not a horse feedbag full.
I'm not sure he ever had a good look at a chainsaw.
Fourth paragraph from the bottom, $18 billion annually (for everyone on the planet) on cosmetics:
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/01/0111_040112_consumerism_2.html
Iraq, $12 billion a month:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23551693/
Hopefully you are just misinformed.
There is a financial incentive to provide drugs. There is a financial incentive to create and push out malware. That's the analog I was using, because it's the financial incentive that drives both drug dealers and malwarers to do what they do.
The FBI could go to work in the US, but they probably wouldn't get much done outside of the country.
In the mean time, the GPS system is not the dumbest military spending, it's actually remarkably useful.
Name the last time the United States went to war with somebody with anti-satellite technology. When you are fighting an asymmetric battle, it is plenty useful.
Glasgow huh. Is that like Dublin?
(So, note that I could probably go on doing this...)
It's "only" $125 million a year if you average it over the 8 years. So they "only" have $100 million to spend on whatever after they pay for the new hires.
It isn't all that ridiculous if you figure that they are pushing a good deal of the funds out to the state level and so forth.
It was for internal use by people involved in the intelligence community.