According to TFA the extra testosterone is to prevent side effects like loss of libido and sexual function.
Anyway, this is just the trial, it may improve given time with no ways to apply it.
And really this is a huge game changer for men. It will give us a level of control over our own fertility that we have never had before, and maybe even lead to other liberating changes just like the pill did.
Yes... but I'm a little concerned that you have to rub it into your back every day? I have t-rex arms, I can't reach my back. This requires cooperation for someone else to work?
Can I just rub it in somewhere else? Like... well... yeah, there that place... or anywhere else.
Which is why you will typically find a person that runs the register while other people handle the food. It's a good answer to your observation.
Have you ever paid attention to the people in a Subway restaurant? Watch them next time. One person is at the register and another person puts food on to handle food... Then they get busy so the person at the register starts helping out with food- puts gloves on as well... then when gets back to register takes money (still wearing gloves)- then goes back to handling food with same gloves on.
Wearing gloves doesn't stop the spread of germs from money to food. If you handle money in gloves you need to throw them away and get a new pair- but they almost never do.
Not picking on just Subway here- lots of places I've witnessed this same thing happens (but Subway is everywhere and happens right in front of you so something I'm sure everyone can relate to).
You remind me of how some black people say that going to college is "acting white" and therefore derided.
I spent my last few High School years in the US at a majority black High School and was surprised to witness this at my school very strongly. A lot of really intelligent black kids would "act dumb" and get bad grades by not doing homework, etc, not because they were lazy, or unintelligent, but because there was a lot of social-pressure on them to act-dumb.
There are probably thousands of would-be highly gifted scientists, inventors, and entrepreneurs doing menial work today because society pushed them in that direction instead of nurturing their gifts.
I find cash more useful in NYC than elsewhere. I never use cash at home- but when I've been up to NYC on conference there have been street vendors and food places that ONLY took cash. (don't know if that has changed dramatically in last several years). I carried cash when I went to NY but never do at home.
I boycott fast food kiosks; I want humans to be employed, even if they're McJobs.
I boycott the self-scan checkout lines for the same reason.
I admire the sentiment- but unless many people do the same, it will look like statistical noise to the companies in charge and the boycott won't work.
Now, as I said, I do admire your reason for boycotting those automated things, but personally, I'm not going to join in. I hate dealing with people- if I can deal with a machine instead (unless it's on the phone). I don't want to put people out of work- but I don't want to have to deal with them either.
Interesting fact about the self-scan checkout lines. Average wait time to go through and process and scan is longer than the express check out lines that they're replacing... average person takes longer checking out their own stuff than a cashier will do it. That said, there's a lot of psychology gone into it to make you "think" that they're quicker- for example, placing them next to the exit so it feels like a quicker get away even if it isn't.
Nah, they'll block the obvious sites. They're responding to a bad press attack by a special interest group. They need to do something so they can say, see, we did something.
Yeah. The big legitimate ones that probably won't download a virus. The small illegitimate ones that don't have a reputation to keep and download viruses- they'll be the ones that people have to access now!
Still... no one needs to be watching that kind of stuff at Starbucks. Falls under public indecency.
Funny, I go to Starbucks every day but I've never spent $6+ for a drink nor does it contain a drop of sugar.
Indeed, I only go to Starbucks once every 3 or 4 months or so and I walk out with a black cup of coffee for about $2 (which is still a lot more than making my own- but not that different to most places outside the home nowadays).
I haven't worked at or heard of any IT company that doesn't provide free coffee to their employees for as long as I can remember. If, in your mind, you need to get coffee from a coffee shop to bring to work, you are probably still in school or work for now, and have always worked for, shit companies who haven't figured out that the cost of caffeine is easily offset by the improvement in productivity providing it confers.
We have free coffee... it's AWFUL!
I brew my own at my desk rather than drink the free crap.
In response, the vice president of YouPorn responded by sending a memo to staff banning Starbucks products from company offices starting Jan. 1, 2019.
People bringing coffee to work is considered pretty normal. People watching porn at a coffee shop isn't. That VP is making YouPorn look pretty stupid.
You're right that one is normal and one isn't; but, I'm pretty sure it was more of a gesture than thinking he was achieving something. I disagree he looks stupid- I would say "petty" is a more accurate term.
I've noticed even in university libraries people talk out loud, eat and drink.
Probably the important word there is "University". At that age, people are either just past "peak rowdiness" or still in it. People tend to notice how they impact other people a little better as they get older.
why would you want to go there at all? Olive Garden is one of those places...... It's mediocre food at a semi-premium price. I'd honestly rather eat at Waffle House or IHOP.
Me too, but it's not just Olive Garden, it's most Italian restaurants nowadays. It's hard to find an Italian restaurant that makes something better than I can at home. Honestly, I typically avoid Italian restaurants because most Italian food is fairly easy to make and the quality I get from making it at home is much better than what I get at restaurants. I suspect the majority of Italian restaurants must do what the majority of Chinese restaurants do now- just buy premade meals in bulk and heat them up. It's nowhere near as good as when the meals are made from scratch and at least moderately fresh.
It depends a lot on the atmosphere. (Disclaimer, I live in Europe) I would never eat in a pub, or sportsbar. For me a bar or pub is for drinking, not eating. I have been in loud restaurants where the atmosphere was extremely nice. I also have been in quiet places, where I felt as if I was at a funeral. Terrible.
The dutch have a word for it "Geroezemoes". It means background noise, murmur, buzz and (not or) chatter. This can be almost silent, but also pretty loud.
It absolutely depends on the mood I am in and the place. e.g. try to imagine a beerhall in Germany to be quiet. It would be depressing.
I personally would walk away from too quiet mor than from too loud. That does not mean I like people shouting all the time. There are better places for that and I enjoy those as well. Just not to eat.
Yes, the opposite extreme can be bad too. One of my favourite Indian restaurants is always dead- almost no one in there and extremely quiet (Indian restaurants never seem to be very busy in the US- Americans have a weird phobia about Indian food). The problem with this one restaurant is I always feel very self-conscious when talking BECAUSE it is so quiet and I feel like the two other customers and the staff can all overhear what I'm saying... not that I'm saying anything they shouldn't hear- I'm just a private person.
I avoid loud restaurants; I'm sure I'm not the only one. They may look nice, and maybe their looks attract more people than their loudness scares off; but, I do take note if a place is too loud and I don't return- so there is a downside to being loud, they do lose some customers... unless I'm just a unique freak.
if you crash the mosquito population then the food chain collapses
Nope. You only attack species of mosquito that attack people (you could be more specific and only attack ones that carry disease). That still leaves the vast majority of mosquito species in place.
Nothing eats just mosquitos anyway. Everything that eats mosquitos gets nutrition from many other sources too. Infact, we've wiped out mosquito populations in many areas many times (and not just harmful ones like this study suggests) and there hasn't been any reported ecological problems caused by wiping out the mosquitos.
You can wipe out harmful mosquitos without crashing the food chain. Considering mosquitos are the animal species that leads to more deaths in humans than any other species on earth- that's a pretty good thing.
Either that, or (most likely) the law of unintended consequences will strike again in yet another huge environmental disaster. I wouldn't put my name on this one if I were Google.
This isn't a new idea. It's been done before and tried in various other countries (or same approach, different specifics)- wiping out mosquitos in an area has not caused any ecological problem in any ecosystem it has been tried in. Now granted, it's only ever been done on a location-specific area and within a year the mosquitos are back. Noone has tried doing a large-spread wiping out of mosquitos over a very large region yet.
Bats eat a lot more than just mosquitos. Nothing eats ONLY mosquitos. Not one species relies solely on mosquitos... and besides only a minority of mosquito species bite people. To prevent spread of human disease you only wipe out the mosquitos that bite people.
The "friendly" mosquitos will then move in instead.
Microsoft latest line of success seems to be offering services outside of what Apples normal scope. Sure Apple may have a competing product, but it is often second or third fiddle to the company.
Nearly everyone who I met who had a Windows Phone, actually liked it. However I think its biggest problem wasn't technical, but the fact we suffered too much from the Microsoft Monopoly, and being Microsoft main grab was the fact that all your programs worked in Windows.
Most non-technical people probably paid a lot more attention to hype than anything else. Windows Phone was ridiculed from day one. I never used one so can't comment on it's features but it simply wasn't "cool" and as much as we'd like to believe that doesn't, or shouldn't matter- it does... for many many people. When smart phones began to take off Apple was at peak "cool" and Microsoft was at peak "establishment meh" - now neither company is considered cool... they're both "establishment meh". Microsoft still has it's domination of office and home PC to fall back on with no real threat (unless you consider chromebook a threat)- Apple's realms of dominance the phone and Tablet were challenged from day one and it's just going to hemorrhage market share in the next decade.
Might last longer. Apple is losing it's niche. The Apple phone and tablet used to have the perception of better quality to android (arguable I'm sure) - now it just looks like an uncool old person phone. Apple phone is no longer cool or perceived as better quality.
Laptops- they've not really had much innovation in a long time.
Unless they have a new idea or new product I can see their star waning. They've got enough capital to last forever though and still very profitable so they're never going away in our lifetime.
Microsoft... everyone hates Microsoft and they seem to fail at most new ventures they try, but their core businesses Windows and Office are still the standard almost every office in the country. They are a major player in video game consoles and cloud platforms. They might not be able to launch any new successful products- but their cash cows are still strong.
I can easily see over the next 20 years MS continuing to be MS and Apple slowly waning.
Nike: Bankrupt. People will stop wearing shoes when personal robots carry you everywhere. Step on the low robot platform and it will move around for you. Boeing: Bankrupt. People will stop flying on commercial airlines as soon as automated mini aircraft are commissionable.
Do you think they will pay me for that? Probably not. I need to write a more rosy story to poke their egos for them to believe it.
Slashdot Mirror
The daily neck and shoulder massage would be great. Until your wife started growing a beard and randomly beating the shit out of you.
That happens anyway.
According to TFA the extra testosterone is to prevent side effects like loss of libido and sexual function.
Anyway, this is just the trial, it may improve given time with no ways to apply it.
And really this is a huge game changer for men. It will give us a level of control over our own fertility that we have never had before, and maybe even lead to other liberating changes just like the pill did.
Yes... but I'm a little concerned that you have to rub it into your back every day? I have t-rex arms, I can't reach my back. This requires cooperation for someone else to work?
Can I just rub it in somewhere else? Like... well... yeah, there that place... or anywhere else.
So weepy roid rage? I can envision the other results, Moobs and erections that last more than 4 hours.
This is Slashdot. The people here already have moobs...and erections that last the length of an anime feature.
Which is why you will typically find a person that runs the register while other people handle the food. It's a good answer to your observation.
Have you ever paid attention to the people in a Subway restaurant? Watch them next time. One person is at the register and another person puts food on to handle food... Then they get busy so the person at the register starts helping out with food- puts gloves on as well... then when gets back to register takes money (still wearing gloves)- then goes back to handling food with same gloves on.
Wearing gloves doesn't stop the spread of germs from money to food. If you handle money in gloves you need to throw them away and get a new pair- but they almost never do.
Not picking on just Subway here- lots of places I've witnessed this same thing happens (but Subway is everywhere and happens right in front of you so something I'm sure everyone can relate to).
You remind me of how some black people say that going to college is "acting white" and therefore derided.
I spent my last few High School years in the US at a majority black High School and was surprised to witness this at my school very strongly. A lot of really intelligent black kids would "act dumb" and get bad grades by not doing homework, etc, not because they were lazy, or unintelligent, but because there was a lot of social-pressure on them to act-dumb.
There are probably thousands of would-be highly gifted scientists, inventors, and entrepreneurs doing menial work today because society pushed them in that direction instead of nurturing their gifts.
I find cash more useful in NYC than elsewhere. I never use cash at home- but when I've been up to NYC on conference there have been street vendors and food places that ONLY took cash. (don't know if that has changed dramatically in last several years). I carried cash when I went to NY but never do at home.
I boycott fast food kiosks; I want humans to be employed, even if they're McJobs.
I boycott the self-scan checkout lines for the same reason.
I admire the sentiment- but unless many people do the same, it will look like statistical noise to the companies in charge and the boycott won't work.
Now, as I said, I do admire your reason for boycotting those automated things, but personally, I'm not going to join in. I hate dealing with people- if I can deal with a machine instead (unless it's on the phone). I don't want to put people out of work- but I don't want to have to deal with them either.
Interesting fact about the self-scan checkout lines. Average wait time to go through and process and scan is longer than the express check out lines that they're replacing... average person takes longer checking out their own stuff than a cashier will do it. That said, there's a lot of psychology gone into it to make you "think" that they're quicker- for example, placing them next to the exit so it feels like a quicker get away even if it isn't.
Slashdot should change there motto from: "News for Nerds" to: "Yesterday's News Today!"
True for all News Aggregators and always has been.
Am I just supposed to drink coffee and jerk off at home now or what?
Just be careful if you're jiggling around doing that, that you don't spill your coffee.
Nah, they'll block the obvious sites. They're responding to a bad press attack by a special interest group. They need to do something so they can say, see, we did something.
Yeah. The big legitimate ones that probably won't download a virus. The small illegitimate ones that don't have a reputation to keep and download viruses- they'll be the ones that people have to access now!
Still... no one needs to be watching that kind of stuff at Starbucks. Falls under public indecency.
all my sales department would disagree with you :)
"Sales Department" - you just proved him right. Sales Departments don't do work.
Funny, I go to Starbucks every day but I've never spent $6+ for a drink nor does it contain a drop of sugar.
Indeed, I only go to Starbucks once every 3 or 4 months or so and I walk out with a black cup of coffee for about $2 (which is still a lot more than making my own- but not that different to most places outside the home nowadays).
I haven't worked at or heard of any IT company that doesn't provide free coffee to their employees for as long as I can remember. If, in your mind, you need to get coffee from a coffee shop to bring to work, you are probably still in school or work for now, and have always worked for, shit companies who haven't figured out that the cost of caffeine is easily offset by the improvement in productivity providing it confers.
We have free coffee... it's AWFUL!
I brew my own at my desk rather than drink the free crap.
People bringing coffee to work is considered pretty normal. People watching porn at a coffee shop isn't. That VP is making YouPorn look pretty stupid.
You're right that one is normal and one isn't; but, I'm pretty sure it was more of a gesture than thinking he was achieving something. I disagree he looks stupid- I would say "petty" is a more accurate term.
I've noticed even in university libraries people talk out loud, eat and drink.
Probably the important word there is "University". At that age, people are either just past "peak rowdiness" or still in it. People tend to notice how they impact other people a little better as they get older.
why would you want to go there at all? Olive Garden is one of those places ... ... It's mediocre food at a semi-premium price. I'd honestly rather eat at Waffle House or IHOP.
Me too, but it's not just Olive Garden, it's most Italian restaurants nowadays. It's hard to find an Italian restaurant that makes something better than I can at home. Honestly, I typically avoid Italian restaurants because most Italian food is fairly easy to make and the quality I get from making it at home is much better than what I get at restaurants. I suspect the majority of Italian restaurants must do what the majority of Chinese restaurants do now- just buy premade meals in bulk and heat them up. It's nowhere near as good as when the meals are made from scratch and at least moderately fresh.
Obviously if Indian food wasnâ(TM)t popular the restaurants would be out of business.,.think more and post less.
They do. They open and 6 months later they're closed. (perhaps you should "think more and post less")
The one I was referencing though has been open a long time now, several years, I suspect it gets busier in the evening; I only go for lunch.
It depends a lot on the atmosphere. (Disclaimer, I live in Europe) I would never eat in a pub, or sportsbar. For me a bar or pub is for drinking, not eating.
I have been in loud restaurants where the atmosphere was extremely nice. I also have been in quiet places, where I felt as if I was at a funeral. Terrible.
The dutch have a word for it "Geroezemoes". It means background noise, murmur, buzz and (not or) chatter. This can be almost silent, but also pretty loud.
It absolutely depends on the mood I am in and the place. e.g. try to imagine a beerhall in Germany to be quiet. It would be depressing.
I personally would walk away from too quiet mor than from too loud. That does not mean I like people shouting all the time. There are better places for that and I enjoy those as well. Just not to eat.
Yes, the opposite extreme can be bad too. One of my favourite Indian restaurants is always dead- almost no one in there and extremely quiet (Indian restaurants never seem to be very busy in the US- Americans have a weird phobia about Indian food). The problem with this one restaurant is I always feel very self-conscious when talking BECAUSE it is so quiet and I feel like the two other customers and the staff can all overhear what I'm saying... not that I'm saying anything they shouldn't hear- I'm just a private person.
I avoid loud restaurants; I'm sure I'm not the only one. They may look nice, and maybe their looks attract more people than their loudness scares off; but, I do take note if a place is too loud and I don't return- so there is a downside to being loud, they do lose some customers... unless I'm just a unique freak.
if you crash the mosquito population then the food chain collapses
Nope. You only attack species of mosquito that attack people (you could be more specific and only attack ones that carry disease). That still leaves the vast majority of mosquito species in place.
Nothing eats just mosquitos anyway. Everything that eats mosquitos gets nutrition from many other sources too. Infact, we've wiped out mosquito populations in many areas many times (and not just harmful ones like this study suggests) and there hasn't been any reported ecological problems caused by wiping out the mosquitos.
You can wipe out harmful mosquitos without crashing the food chain. Considering mosquitos are the animal species that leads to more deaths in humans than any other species on earth- that's a pretty good thing.
Either that, or (most likely) the law of unintended consequences will strike again in yet another huge environmental disaster. I wouldn't put my name on this one if I were Google.
This isn't a new idea. It's been done before and tried in various other countries (or same approach, different specifics)- wiping out mosquitos in an area has not caused any ecological problem in any ecosystem it has been tried in. Now granted, it's only ever been done on a location-specific area and within a year the mosquitos are back. Noone has tried doing a large-spread wiping out of mosquitos over a very large region yet.
And then what will bats eat?
Bats eat a lot more than just mosquitos. Nothing eats ONLY mosquitos. Not one species relies solely on mosquitos... and besides only a minority of mosquito species bite people. To prevent spread of human disease you only wipe out the mosquitos that bite people.
The "friendly" mosquitos will then move in instead.
Microsoft latest line of success seems to be offering services outside of what Apples normal scope. Sure Apple may have a competing product, but it is often second or third fiddle to the company.
Nearly everyone who I met who had a Windows Phone, actually liked it. However I think its biggest problem wasn't technical, but the fact we suffered too much from the Microsoft Monopoly, and being Microsoft main grab was the fact that all your programs worked in Windows.
Most non-technical people probably paid a lot more attention to hype than anything else. Windows Phone was ridiculed from day one. I never used one so can't comment on it's features but it simply wasn't "cool" and as much as we'd like to believe that doesn't, or shouldn't matter- it does... for many many people. When smart phones began to take off Apple was at peak "cool" and Microsoft was at peak "establishment meh" - now neither company is considered cool... they're both "establishment meh". Microsoft still has it's domination of office and home PC to fall back on with no real threat (unless you consider chromebook a threat)- Apple's realms of dominance the phone and Tablet were challenged from day one and it's just going to hemorrhage market share in the next decade.
About as well as the windows phone...
Might last longer. Apple is losing it's niche. The Apple phone and tablet used to have the perception of better quality to android (arguable I'm sure) - now it just looks like an uncool old person phone. Apple phone is no longer cool or perceived as better quality.
Laptops- they've not really had much innovation in a long time.
Unless they have a new idea or new product I can see their star waning. They've got enough capital to last forever though and still very profitable so they're never going away in our lifetime.
Microsoft... everyone hates Microsoft and they seem to fail at most new ventures they try, but their core businesses Windows and Office are still the standard almost every office in the country. They are a major player in video game consoles and cloud platforms. They might not be able to launch any new successful products- but their cash cows are still strong.
I can easily see over the next 20 years MS continuing to be MS and Apple slowly waning.
Nike: Bankrupt. People will stop wearing shoes when personal robots carry you everywhere. Step on the low robot platform and it will move around for you.
Boeing: Bankrupt. People will stop flying on commercial airlines as soon as automated mini aircraft are commissionable.
Do you think they will pay me for that? Probably not. I need to write a more rosy story to poke their egos for them to believe it.