If you think it will be easier to get rid of weapons than to deal with the problem of people with mental and emotional problems, then I think you forget the two examples of similar failure we have in the US. Weapons already require registration and all manner of regulation and it matters not. Worse, when try to take things from people, they tend to react. They tried to take alcohol and organized crime and violence was the direct result. Same story with drugs -- gangs and violence all around for everyone. And in both of those classic cases, the characters involved in the organized crime have been glamorized in art and culture. So not only has it changed the US culture to accept additional violence and crime, we "admire it."
Tell me how banning firearms will result in anything different?
The reason, I think, is because alcohol is absorbed by the skin and will result in intoxication. This problem has been identified long ago among small children as their low body volume makes them more vulnerable to the effects.
No. What we need is a comfortable middle-ground in which we are not excessively dirty but not so clean that our immune and digenstive systems remain healthy.
I am the blessed forcus of a severely obsessive and uncontrolled mind. Even before the topic was responded to by people interested in it, we are flooded with commentary in MY HONOR!
You know, with mental illness as the sub-topic of the recent violent incident involving children the same age as my youngest son, news organizations are looking for the next great related story. Only recently, a newspaper had taken to "creating news" by publishing an interactive map of registered gun owners which stirred up both hostile and smug responses depending on which side of the polarizing issue a person may be. But the dialogue is also moving into the direction of mental health and how we can detect protential problems.
Here, for example, we have a particular individual (or set of individuals?) who go(es) out of his way to leave an enormous trail of evidence behind which to study and investigate. And since I am one of the focuses, I have already been contacted by parties interested in this angle of the story. I hope my interviews provide are useful insight into the problem at hand.
The problem isn't in the first world... not THAT problem anyway. The birth rates in the US and other first world countries are on the decline. We work longer and have fewer children. The third world countries, on the other hand, can't ship their children to us fast enough. And in those countries, they keep having children they can't feed. All those "feed the children" charities aren't paying for television ads for no reason are they?
So we have a problem alright. We have uneven progress and development across this planet. We have 1st and 3rd worlds... the Morlocks and the Eloi. We in the first world are to become the Morlocks if we could just get rid of that annoying middle class. And the Eloi are those who live in the 3rd world and/or in poverty within the first world. There can't be equality because that would upset the balance after all right?
I think, and have always thought, that the natural way of cultivating foods for human consumption is better. The business people strive to reduce loss and to increase production. But they forget to ask questions which has less to do with money such as environmental costs or anything to do with "long term" effects of short term gains.
Of course, as long as "everyone" is doing it, no one is responsible and of course if a few hold back from those practices, they will be swallowed up by those who do in the short term.
Welcome to the system.
The government regulators exist to prevent these types of systemic problems. What's that? Bought and paid for you say? Hrm... didn't see that one coming.
Yeah... didn't work. Should have known better. But for some reason this all makes me smile. Seems he spun himself into a fury of crazy that fed on itself..
It's pretty awesome if you think about it. The effort of just one post and then it gets followed with ALL THAT. The words "self control" have no meaning at all.
I never post AC. Never. It's annoying and difficult to find replies.
I was thinking of a way to save links to my AC posts in a hosts file though.
This is something that gets to the heart of what copyright is being turned into.
Initially, copyright is what the name says it is -- the [exclusive] right to make copies for distribution.
But as we have seen with things like "region coding" and the like, we are seeing attempts at controlling not just who can legally make copies, but who can legally have access to it. Information for one region cannot be legal in another region. In some circles, we call this censorship. In others, we call these trade barriers.
Big media:
Go ahead and do your worst. Branding like "DRM Free" and "Independent" have become the new "Organic" and industry labels have become the new "Toxic." Your disrespect of your customers/consumers is increasingly more recognized. Artists all over the world, using home computers and even iPads are creating content which is fun and entertaining. Small projects are becoming bigger projects and they don't involve you. So please. Enlighten the rest of the world by restricting them from having free access to your stuff and the new Organic entertainment out there will replace you.
Apparently, he has been published and is therefore a celebrity or something like that. Anyway, he has a bizarre set of problems which include replying to his own posts pretending to be someone else, assertions that he had "blown away," "burned," "destroyed" or any other such juveline taunt. He apparently believes I and others are "Jorge Bastida" whoever that may be. His mental deficiencies are his reality and therefore he projects his notion of what normal healthy behavior is upon everyone else. He therefore believes multiple people are all one and has little to do than sit here and and attempt to belittle and berate them with commentary.
Of course his problems with reality extend into the realm of believing things which aren't "quite right." I attempted to point out that this sort of behavior is archived for, so far, "ever" on slashdot and that any searches for anything he might have written could be found by anyone including and especially [potential] employers. With all the stories about how government and employers use social networking (which slashdot nearly qualifies as being) I would think this would be obvious but pointing out the obvious is apparently blackmail. (please grow up... please... prove it by not responding to this!)
So with this, I lay shame and I believe I don't need to name. Will it work?
Making people target to all manner of scams and crap?
select * from diseaseRoster where terminal = true;
Reach out to them with life insurance scams that actually pay nothing
select * from diseaseRoster where sexuallyTransmitted = true;
See if any of them can be exploited in any number of ways.
Health privacy exists for a reason. If we can't trust our doctors, diseases will go untreated and things get far worse than they are.
You have a bizarre notion of things you think should be shared.
If you have nothing to hide, please provide me with your real name, your real home address, your real employer, your real phone number and lots more useful informaiton. How about your religion? Your political affiliations? Sexual preference? Your REAL sexual preference? No? Don't want to share? I can't imagine why.
It's all well and good to wish that others lives were laid out for all to see, but not yours right? Before you think everyone you disagree with should be exposed, perhaps you should consider that things change and before you know it, you might be singled out for some cause or reason.
People like you have taken the bait. Hook, line and sinker. So quickly you forget what you know.
The shool shooting couldn't happen as it did without two important conditions being met:
1. A person had to be capable of such an act: mental/emotional problems gone unresolved and unaddressed 2. Availability of weaponry.
it doesn't appear to bother anyone that people with severe mental and emotional problems exist. That insurance doesn't care for them. That healthcare systems tend to look the other way in order to have them released when they can't pay. The definition of "a danger to self or others" is twisted, minimalized and even ignored. And the causes of these problems go unresearched and unprevented.
We are stockpiling these loaded weapons. The real loaded weapons are these people waiting to go off. And without guns, they won't be stopped. They will resort to other things. Poisonings? Gassings? Bombings? Stabbings and slashings? What will we hope to take away from EVERYONE then? Gasoline? Propane?
The problem is that a single event is being used to punish EVERY innocent gun owner out there. How can it be justified? The gun owner who let her son have access to her weapons paid for it with her life.
When the government reacted to 9/11 by creating the DHS and the TSA, most people generally agree this inconvenience does not make us safer. It just takes away our rights without good cause. Now we're seeing it again, but the target is smaller and now we can divide the public on the issue.
And ALL of this ignores the real problem. That we have people who need help and aren't getting it. And these people can and are dangerous to the public. Is the sub-issue of guns more important than the real issue of WHO IS DANGEROUS to the public?
Hand sanitizer is "more" than soap. More is better. Therefore hand sanitizer is better than soap. The logic is simple right? Now go supersize my value meal please.:)
Color by number is a way to get people familiar with and/or interested in trying to paint. It's not "art" and neither is building Lego sets. But each can be used to create new and interesting things when not following the instructions.
I have heard the argument about "specific pieces" being a problem. Well, yes and no. I'm not sure whether you realize it or not, but Lego sometimes includes bits of bionicle and technic in order to create something which would be impossible otherwise.
Lego is the medium. Limiting the medium limits the creativity. Lego understands the balance it is trying to maintain. Sometimes it may seem to cross a line here or there, but their old rules are generally still being followed.
But certain specialized peices like car grills and radiators and engine blocks? Can you really complain about that?
It's like saying "have paint makers sold out because they are pushing 'color by numbers' sets with billion-dollar themes?"
No. It's still putting the medium into the hands of their targets. It shows them how to use them and how to achieve the desired results.
That Lego needs to use billion-dollar-brands to get kids interested in Lego again is... well, unfortunate, but that's the world we live in isn't it?
And personally? I absolutely adore Star Wars Lego stuff. It's cute and fun. Sure, it trivializes the "light v dark" serious exploration of human nature and all that but I doubt many people were paying such close attention to that kind of thing anyway. One of the things I think are cool is being able to see how close we can get to building things we are familiar with using the primitives of Lego. I have always wanted to build my own Lego Firefly, for example. But the cost of the bricks?! My god... it would cost me several hundred dollars I imagine.
It's not so much selling out as it is adapting. They have created their own themes... some with success, some without. Some of the themes I loved did not catch on... Those samurai castle sets were pretty awesome. I still want them. The Pharoahs Quest? Right out of my childhood interests! Problem was they were too expensive. I did manage to get the Sphynx set even if it was a pretty bad design.
And my little one? He adores Lego and unlike his old man, he doesn't like to keep his sets together. He take them apart and makes... OMG, OMG... other things!! New creations. Okay, they aren't complex or awesome, but he is building things and then playing with them. Doesn't matter that the set was originally star wars or harry potter themed. Now he has "a dragon car!!!"
Lego is just fine. They have to stay relevant and in the hands of those who might love them.
By the way, why do you think women wear makeup? Or dress in ways to accentuate their bodies? Because without getting our interest, we won't get to know them otherwise.
Thanks. A bit of an eye-opener and a bit of a reminder of what I already understood in a more general sense.
It is with this knowledge I have to wonder why, outside of a hospital, people are so freaking obsessed with hand sanitizers and stuff. It would seem obvious there is potential for harm in using it all the time. If it weren't for MRSA I wouldn't have added the hospital exception, but thanks hospitals for breeding that for us.... now we can have infections that lead to complications like death and amputaiton. What are we? Back in the civil war era?
Bacteria in the digestive tract has everything to do with how well you can process food. I rather thought everyone knew this already but I guess I was wrong.
We also know that modified bacteria can do all manner of transformative magic from making alcohol to cleaning up oil spills. If it is indeed shown that a dietary supplement of bacteria or something like that could make it so that I can look and feel healthy like I was when I was in my 20s and 30s without all the diet and exercise I have to do, then bring it on. Between now and then, I have become a completely different person. I can't eat as much or the same foods and I never needed to exercise before. Before I knew what was going on, I ballooned from 180lbs to 250lbs and went up in clothing sizes along with the weight.
I literally had to work my ass off. Low-carb and exercise brought me back and now I have to eat with moderation in all things but especially sugary foods, bread and pasta. Oh... to eat pizza again...
I know all too well what role bacteria plays in the digestive system. Too much or too little of certain buggers make you a flatulent friend indeed.
But 486SX was not lusted after its announcement. 486 was. Yeah, sure, additional other improvements. Is it really necessary to add to the details? Does it invalidate my point to omit them?
When people are looking to get better performance, they seek the processing power of other processors. Yes, I know "GPUs are optimized for [blah blah blah]" but in the end, they are still a processor and are efficient at what they do. x86 is just not so efficient but we've got all this legacy crap... and why? Because the software business liked to keep the sources to themselves so we need to keep out x86 processors. If everything was under Linux and we wanted to move to a better performing processor? Recompile the kernel, recompile the OS support, recompile the environment and shells, recompile the applications. There's a whole distro based on the idea of compiling everything from source and it's still quite popular.
But we want more performance. Yeah.. better for games... but better for many other things too eh? Bitcoin mining? Decryption? x86 can do these things too but if the advantages of a better architecture were implemented in x86, it would break compatibility most likely.
Anyone remember back in the day when the x87 co-processor was the way to boost performance of your machine? How the 486 was the combination of 386 and 387? People lusted after the 486 when it was announced. They could do that again I suppose but it would be late... too late. And now Intel will suffer for its failure to keep up and now it will only be used for some stuff while the real processing will go on in graphics cards. Brilliant.
That was then. This is now. Apple is already in decline. People are annoyed at the things Apple will not allow. The iPhone 5 is not quite the wait-in-line-for-weeks thing that its predecessors were. The public knows all too well why Apple took away Google maps and that Apple was proven inadequate when it came to selecting a replacement. And the public was very quick to get their old maps back and recognize this as Apple's defeat and humiliation in this. (I know, it sounds a bit too dramatic, but ask around... if you know any iPhone users, see what they have to say about it.)
MBAs now run Apple. They prefer to make "safe choices" unlike Steve Jobs. Steve Jobs, despite his huge ego and other faults, knew how to excite consumers. These MBAs don't. Safe choices don't excite people. Safe choices is why there are so many movie sequels and remakes instead of new [risky] creative works.
Apple had it for a while... they don't have it now. It's gone.
That would be good at some levels, but I think we'd be better off in the long run if we were to ignore commercial interests and start proving which things cause health problems in humans and eliminate them. The problem is we want money more than life and heath and are perfectly happy sacrificing the rest of humanity so we can have better preservatives, pain relievers, sweeteners and other such things.
The problem would be doing it right and perfect each and every time and to be able to intervene if things start to go bad along the way. A six-legged calf isn't so much of a moral issue... but deformed human clones?! Uh boy.... do we have to go there?
Now that's just creepy. Nothing like giving a child; a clone child at that; giving a child a serious identity complex. "We loved your source so much and when we lost him, we wanted to bring him back. Now we have you." Huh?! What? You love me or my ghost brother?! WTF?!
Most brains are wasted completely and utterly on religion and territorial battles. Increasing the number of brains will not matter since the brains who are in charge are NOT the best brains we have... only the most selfish and sociopathic.
No, it's a terrible way... for men anyway. Fact is, women very often use men so they can have children and simply "change" after they got what they want. Often the current legal system is used as a means of collecting child support so that the woman doesn't have to work for a living. Stuff like this goes on more than I would like to think. And I was almost a victim of ridiculous rules about child support where my ex-wife was collecting welfare in California and she included our two sons in with the claim. I don't know how long the process takes, but eventually, the state of California tracked me down to my employer and informed them of the requirement to take my pay. This was very confusing for me and for my employer. The problem? *I* had the children with me and had been with me for quite some time. Had them enrolled in school. The records of my having them were abundantly available. The child support office in Texas said "it is not our responsibility to validate the claims made by other states" and apparently the rules for proof are equally bad in California. I actually had to take my sons out of school, drag them down to the child support office with all sorts of paperwork to prove I am their father and that my sons are with me. What the hell!? So easy for women to make claims and so hard for men to fight it.
We used to appreciate the need for a strong nuclear family. I don't know when that changed... probably before I realized it... I grew up rather old fashioned and still think like that most of the time.
There is a population decline in the first world. The third world is multiplying like rabbits, however. "Save the children"? Really? Stop having children you can't support. I know. I know... that's a first-world person's mind. I'm sure there are good reasons for bringing in a baby which cannot be supported into the world. To be fair, a lot of it is instinct but we can't talk about that because instinct is something only animals have instead of minds to think with and we can't go anywhere near that subject.
It might seem somewhat orwellian or apocalyptic or something, but I seriously think there should be some population controls in place as it is. But once again, no one wants to go there... to decide who should reproduce and who shouldn't. "Do you have a license for that baby?" The world is facing some serious problems with population and resources. It is presently not sustainable and something has got to give. And with global warming changing the way rain falls all over the planet, there will soon be some massive dyings in different parts of the world... and violence... there's always violence... all of which could be avoided if we would simply take charge of our human existance and bring things under control.
It would be immoral... but is it less immoral to let thousands of not millions die of starvation? Only the 1% are expected to survive all of this well you know.
Slashdot Mirror
If you think it will be easier to get rid of weapons than to deal with the problem of people with mental and emotional problems, then I think you forget the two examples of similar failure we have in the US. Weapons already require registration and all manner of regulation and it matters not. Worse, when try to take things from people, they tend to react. They tried to take alcohol and organized crime and violence was the direct result. Same story with drugs -- gangs and violence all around for everyone. And in both of those classic cases, the characters involved in the organized crime have been glamorized in art and culture. So not only has it changed the US culture to accept additional violence and crime, we "admire it."
Tell me how banning firearms will result in anything different?
The reason, I think, is because alcohol is absorbed by the skin and will result in intoxication. This problem has been identified long ago among small children as their low body volume makes them more vulnerable to the effects.
No. What we need is a comfortable middle-ground in which we are not excessively dirty but not so clean that our immune and digenstive systems remain healthy.
I am the blessed forcus of a severely obsessive and uncontrolled mind. Even before the topic was responded to by people interested in it, we are flooded with commentary in MY HONOR!
You know, with mental illness as the sub-topic of the recent violent incident involving children the same age as my youngest son, news organizations are looking for the next great related story. Only recently, a newspaper had taken to "creating news" by publishing an interactive map of registered gun owners which stirred up both hostile and smug responses depending on which side of the polarizing issue a person may be. But the dialogue is also moving into the direction of mental health and how we can detect protential problems.
Here, for example, we have a particular individual (or set of individuals?) who go(es) out of his way to leave an enormous trail of evidence behind which to study and investigate. And since I am one of the focuses, I have already been contacted by parties interested in this angle of the story. I hope my interviews provide are useful insight into the problem at hand.
And would you like to talk about the problem?
The problem isn't in the first world... not THAT problem anyway. The birth rates in the US and other first world countries are on the decline. We work longer and have fewer children. The third world countries, on the other hand, can't ship their children to us fast enough. And in those countries, they keep having children they can't feed. All those "feed the children" charities aren't paying for television ads for no reason are they?
So we have a problem alright. We have uneven progress and development across this planet. We have 1st and 3rd worlds... the Morlocks and the Eloi. We in the first world are to become the Morlocks if we could just get rid of that annoying middle class. And the Eloi are those who live in the 3rd world and/or in poverty within the first world. There can't be equality because that would upset the balance after all right?
I think, and have always thought, that the natural way of cultivating foods for human consumption is better. The business people strive to reduce loss and to increase production. But they forget to ask questions which has less to do with money such as environmental costs or anything to do with "long term" effects of short term gains.
Of course, as long as "everyone" is doing it, no one is responsible and of course if a few hold back from those practices, they will be swallowed up by those who do in the short term.
Welcome to the system.
The government regulators exist to prevent these types of systemic problems. What's that? Bought and paid for you say? Hrm... didn't see that one coming.
Yeah... didn't work. Should have known better. But for some reason this all makes me smile. Seems he spun himself into a fury of crazy that fed on itself..
It's pretty awesome if you think about it. The effort of just one post and then it gets followed with ALL THAT. The words "self control" have no meaning at all.
I never post AC. Never. It's annoying and difficult to find replies.
I was thinking of a way to save links to my AC posts in a hosts file though.
This is something that gets to the heart of what copyright is being turned into.
Initially, copyright is what the name says it is -- the [exclusive] right to make copies for distribution.
But as we have seen with things like "region coding" and the like, we are seeing attempts at controlling not just who can legally make copies, but who can legally have access to it. Information for one region cannot be legal in another region. In some circles, we call this censorship. In others, we call these trade barriers.
Big media:
Go ahead and do your worst. Branding like "DRM Free" and "Independent" have become the new "Organic" and industry labels have become the new "Toxic." Your disrespect of your customers/consumers is increasingly more recognized. Artists all over the world, using home computers and even iPads are creating content which is fun and entertaining. Small projects are becoming bigger projects and they don't involve you. So please. Enlighten the rest of the world by restricting them from having free access to your stuff and the new Organic entertainment out there will replace you.
There is a person who frequents here, famous for using hosts files as a security something or other some-such. I had gone for quite some time without having to see or hear from him but apparently has come back.
Apparently, he has been published and is therefore a celebrity or something like that. Anyway, he has a bizarre set of problems which include replying to his own posts pretending to be someone else, assertions that he had "blown away," "burned," "destroyed" or any other such juveline taunt. He apparently believes I and others are "Jorge Bastida" whoever that may be. His mental deficiencies are his reality and therefore he projects his notion of what normal healthy behavior is upon everyone else. He therefore believes multiple people are all one and has little to do than sit here and and attempt to belittle and berate them with commentary.
Of course his problems with reality extend into the realm of believing things which aren't "quite right." I attempted to point out that this sort of behavior is archived for, so far, "ever" on slashdot and that any searches for anything he might have written could be found by anyone including and especially [potential] employers. With all the stories about how government and employers use social networking (which slashdot nearly qualifies as being) I would think this would be obvious but pointing out the obvious is apparently blackmail. (please grow up... please... prove it by not responding to this!)
So with this, I lay shame and I believe I don't need to name. Will it work?
Making people target to all manner of scams and crap?
select * from diseaseRoster where terminal = true;
Reach out to them with life insurance scams that actually pay nothing
select * from diseaseRoster where sexuallyTransmitted = true;
See if any of them can be exploited in any number of ways.
Health privacy exists for a reason. If we can't trust our doctors, diseases will go untreated and things get far worse than they are.
You have a bizarre notion of things you think should be shared.
If you have nothing to hide, please provide me with your real name, your real home address, your real employer, your real phone number and lots more useful informaiton. How about your religion? Your political affiliations? Sexual preference? Your REAL sexual preference? No? Don't want to share? I can't imagine why.
It's all well and good to wish that others lives were laid out for all to see, but not yours right? Before you think everyone you disagree with should be exposed, perhaps you should consider that things change and before you know it, you might be singled out for some cause or reason.
People like you have taken the bait. Hook, line and sinker. So quickly you forget what you know.
The shool shooting couldn't happen as it did without two important conditions being met:
1. A person had to be capable of such an act: mental/emotional problems gone unresolved and unaddressed
2. Availability of weaponry.
it doesn't appear to bother anyone that people with severe mental and emotional problems exist. That insurance doesn't care for them. That healthcare systems tend to look the other way in order to have them released when they can't pay. The definition of "a danger to self or others" is twisted, minimalized and even ignored. And the causes of these problems go unresearched and unprevented.
We are stockpiling these loaded weapons. The real loaded weapons are these people waiting to go off. And without guns, they won't be stopped. They will resort to other things. Poisonings? Gassings? Bombings? Stabbings and slashings? What will we hope to take away from EVERYONE then? Gasoline? Propane?
The problem is that a single event is being used to punish EVERY innocent gun owner out there. How can it be justified? The gun owner who let her son have access to her weapons paid for it with her life.
When the government reacted to 9/11 by creating the DHS and the TSA, most people generally agree this inconvenience does not make us safer. It just takes away our rights without good cause. Now we're seeing it again, but the target is smaller and now we can divide the public on the issue.
And ALL of this ignores the real problem. That we have people who need help and aren't getting it. And these people can and are dangerous to the public. Is the sub-issue of guns more important than the real issue of WHO IS DANGEROUS to the public?
It just proves the right to privacy is meaningless if you have to tell the government what you are doing, buying and owning.
This practice will just make gun owners buy their stuff "illegally."
Hand sanitizer is "more" than soap. More is better. Therefore hand sanitizer is better than soap. The logic is simple right? Now go supersize my value meal please. :)
Color by number is a way to get people familiar with and/or interested in trying to paint. It's not "art" and neither is building Lego sets. But each can be used to create new and interesting things when not following the instructions.
Your rage is misplaced.
I have heard the argument about "specific pieces" being a problem. Well, yes and no. I'm not sure whether you realize it or not, but Lego sometimes includes bits of bionicle and technic in order to create something which would be impossible otherwise.
Lego is the medium. Limiting the medium limits the creativity. Lego understands the balance it is trying to maintain. Sometimes it may seem to cross a line here or there, but their old rules are generally still being followed.
But certain specialized peices like car grills and radiators and engine blocks? Can you really complain about that?
It's like saying "have paint makers sold out because they are pushing 'color by numbers' sets with billion-dollar themes?"
No. It's still putting the medium into the hands of their targets. It shows them how to use them and how to achieve the desired results.
That Lego needs to use billion-dollar-brands to get kids interested in Lego again is... well, unfortunate, but that's the world we live in isn't it?
And personally? I absolutely adore Star Wars Lego stuff. It's cute and fun. Sure, it trivializes the "light v dark" serious exploration of human nature and all that but I doubt many people were paying such close attention to that kind of thing anyway. One of the things I think are cool is being able to see how close we can get to building things we are familiar with using the primitives of Lego. I have always wanted to build my own Lego Firefly, for example. But the cost of the bricks?! My god... it would cost me several hundred dollars I imagine.
It's not so much selling out as it is adapting. They have created their own themes... some with success, some without. Some of the themes I loved did not catch on... Those samurai castle sets were pretty awesome. I still want them. The Pharoahs Quest? Right out of my childhood interests! Problem was they were too expensive. I did manage to get the Sphynx set even if it was a pretty bad design.
And my little one? He adores Lego and unlike his old man, he doesn't like to keep his sets together. He take them apart and makes... OMG, OMG... other things!! New creations. Okay, they aren't complex or awesome, but he is building things and then playing with them. Doesn't matter that the set was originally star wars or harry potter themed. Now he has "a dragon car!!!"
Lego is just fine. They have to stay relevant and in the hands of those who might love them.
By the way, why do you think women wear makeup? Or dress in ways to accentuate their bodies? Because without getting our interest, we won't get to know them otherwise.
Thanks. A bit of an eye-opener and a bit of a reminder of what I already understood in a more general sense.
It is with this knowledge I have to wonder why, outside of a hospital, people are so freaking obsessed with hand sanitizers and stuff. It would seem obvious there is potential for harm in using it all the time. If it weren't for MRSA I wouldn't have added the hospital exception, but thanks hospitals for breeding that for us.... now we can have infections that lead to complications like death and amputaiton. What are we? Back in the civil war era?
Bacteria in the digestive tract has everything to do with how well you can process food. I rather thought everyone knew this already but I guess I was wrong.
We also know that modified bacteria can do all manner of transformative magic from making alcohol to cleaning up oil spills. If it is indeed shown that a dietary supplement of bacteria or something like that could make it so that I can look and feel healthy like I was when I was in my 20s and 30s without all the diet and exercise I have to do, then bring it on. Between now and then, I have become a completely different person. I can't eat as much or the same foods and I never needed to exercise before. Before I knew what was going on, I ballooned from 180lbs to 250lbs and went up in clothing sizes along with the weight.
I literally had to work my ass off. Low-carb and exercise brought me back and now I have to eat with moderation in all things but especially sugary foods, bread and pasta. Oh... to eat pizza again...
I know all too well what role bacteria plays in the digestive system. Too much or too little of certain buggers make you a flatulent friend indeed.
Uhm no.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_80386#The_i386SX_variant
But 486SX was not lusted after its announcement. 486 was. Yeah, sure, additional other improvements. Is it really necessary to add to the details? Does it invalidate my point to omit them?
When people are looking to get better performance, they seek the processing power of other processors. Yes, I know "GPUs are optimized for [blah blah blah]" but in the end, they are still a processor and are efficient at what they do. x86 is just not so efficient but we've got all this legacy crap... and why? Because the software business liked to keep the sources to themselves so we need to keep out x86 processors. If everything was under Linux and we wanted to move to a better performing processor? Recompile the kernel, recompile the OS support, recompile the environment and shells, recompile the applications. There's a whole distro based on the idea of compiling everything from source and it's still quite popular.
But we want more performance. Yeah.. better for games... but better for many other things too eh? Bitcoin mining? Decryption? x86 can do these things too but if the advantages of a better architecture were implemented in x86, it would break compatibility most likely.
Anyone remember back in the day when the x87 co-processor was the way to boost performance of your machine? How the 486 was the combination of 386 and 387? People lusted after the 486 when it was announced. They could do that again I suppose but it would be late... too late. And now Intel will suffer for its failure to keep up and now it will only be used for some stuff while the real processing will go on in graphics cards. Brilliant.
That was then. This is now. Apple is already in decline. People are annoyed at the things Apple will not allow. The iPhone 5 is not quite the wait-in-line-for-weeks thing that its predecessors were. The public knows all too well why Apple took away Google maps and that Apple was proven inadequate when it came to selecting a replacement. And the public was very quick to get their old maps back and recognize this as Apple's defeat and humiliation in this. (I know, it sounds a bit too dramatic, but ask around... if you know any iPhone users, see what they have to say about it.)
MBAs now run Apple. They prefer to make "safe choices" unlike Steve Jobs. Steve Jobs, despite his huge ego and other faults, knew how to excite consumers. These MBAs don't. Safe choices don't excite people. Safe choices is why there are so many movie sequels and remakes instead of new [risky] creative works.
Apple had it for a while... they don't have it now. It's gone.
That would be good at some levels, but I think we'd be better off in the long run if we were to ignore commercial interests and start proving which things cause health problems in humans and eliminate them. The problem is we want money more than life and heath and are perfectly happy sacrificing the rest of humanity so we can have better preservatives, pain relievers, sweeteners and other such things.
The money would be better spent on prevention.
The problem would be doing it right and perfect each and every time and to be able to intervene if things start to go bad along the way. A six-legged calf isn't so much of a moral issue... but deformed human clones?! Uh boy.... do we have to go there?
Now that's just creepy. Nothing like giving a child; a clone child at that; giving a child a serious identity complex. "We loved your source so much and when we lost him, we wanted to bring him back. Now we have you." Huh?! What? You love me or my ghost brother?! WTF?!
Most brains are wasted completely and utterly on religion and territorial battles. Increasing the number of brains will not matter since the brains who are in charge are NOT the best brains we have... only the most selfish and sociopathic.
No, it's a terrible way... for men anyway. Fact is, women very often use men so they can have children and simply "change" after they got what they want. Often the current legal system is used as a means of collecting child support so that the woman doesn't have to work for a living. Stuff like this goes on more than I would like to think. And I was almost a victim of ridiculous rules about child support where my ex-wife was collecting welfare in California and she included our two sons in with the claim. I don't know how long the process takes, but eventually, the state of California tracked me down to my employer and informed them of the requirement to take my pay. This was very confusing for me and for my employer. The problem? *I* had the children with me and had been with me for quite some time. Had them enrolled in school. The records of my having them were abundantly available. The child support office in Texas said "it is not our responsibility to validate the claims made by other states" and apparently the rules for proof are equally bad in California. I actually had to take my sons out of school, drag them down to the child support office with all sorts of paperwork to prove I am their father and that my sons are with me. What the hell!? So easy for women to make claims and so hard for men to fight it.
We used to appreciate the need for a strong nuclear family. I don't know when that changed... probably before I realized it... I grew up rather old fashioned and still think like that most of the time.
There is a population decline in the first world. The third world is multiplying like rabbits, however. "Save the children"? Really? Stop having children you can't support. I know. I know... that's a first-world person's mind. I'm sure there are good reasons for bringing in a baby which cannot be supported into the world. To be fair, a lot of it is instinct but we can't talk about that because instinct is something only animals have instead of minds to think with and we can't go anywhere near that subject.
It might seem somewhat orwellian or apocalyptic or something, but I seriously think there should be some population controls in place as it is. But once again, no one wants to go there... to decide who should reproduce and who shouldn't. "Do you have a license for that baby?" The world is facing some serious problems with population and resources. It is presently not sustainable and something has got to give. And with global warming changing the way rain falls all over the planet, there will soon be some massive dyings in different parts of the world... and violence... there's always violence... all of which could be avoided if we would simply take charge of our human existance and bring things under control.
It would be immoral... but is it less immoral to let thousands of not millions die of starvation? Only the 1% are expected to survive all of this well you know.
I love that the second link, once played through provides a "related link" to "Ultimate Girls Fail Compilation 2012" :) Somehow fitting.