"Starvation mode" has been shown to be a myth. It comes down to basic math, calories in vs. calories out.
If you eat less and work out more, you lose weight. You do the opposite, you gain.
There's no way for the body to "magically" get fat when eating less. That violates the laws of thermodynamics. Sure, the rate of how quickly you gain or lose weight may change (e.g., when you eat less or change your macros to consume less sugar, you may find yourself being more lethargic in the short term until you get used to it, and so you will burn fewer calories). Or, as you lose weight, you need fewer calories (because there isn't as much of you to support).
But a calorie is a calorie and reducing ~3500 calories results in about 1lb of weight loss. Is it exactly 3500? No. Why? Because there are so many other variables at play. But is it closer to 3500 than, say, 500 or 10,000? You bet.
The sad state of things is such that even though they are using H-1B improperly, those affected are mostly college-educated white males.
I disagree. Given the disproportional representation of Asians in STEM fields, I would say that those affected are mostly college-educated Americans - yes, more white than black, but certainly includes Asians and women.
Obviously, this depends on the location (e.g., more Asians in California and East Coast vs. Midwest), but I think this affects all skilled Americans in IT.
And I think the mistake is in characterizing it as something that only affects white people. It's all about narrative -- bring in other groups, then see the magic unfold.
Also wanted to add that co-opting the fringe primarily seems to be happening with one party (i.e., the GOP), and that is reflected in the election results.
However, please bear in mind that in terms of political views, the US is also more conservative than the rest of western society.
What is considered left in the US would be considered pretty moderate or even center-right in many parts of the world.
In may ways, co-opting the extreme right (e.g., the tea party) and some of the libertarian values reflect this reality.
It may be what you prefer, but empirical studies of choice have shown that most people's choices fall along a median, and success is often the result of trying to accommodate one side of the median and most of the median.
It's the same with consumer products, and it's the same with elections.
All systems lean towards simplicity, and the more mature a system is (i.e., it's been around for longer), the more strong parties coalesce towards the median.
You know the only thing worse than an Uber driver? A hippie bicyclist complaining about the Uber drivers.
Free market, bro. Surge pricing works because there is a limited availability, high demand, and the company is charging what they can get away with.
Scheduling pickups? As someone who travels every week, I can certainly relate to this. But then what's stopping you from canceling and just paying the $5 fine or whatever? Or what happens if Uber is unable to have a driver pick you up? Given the complexity involved in scheduling systems, they probably find it easier to do "point in time" scheduling, which works for their business model. 80/20, and the number of folks who want to schedule are much, much smaller and the effort required to arrange for it is probably significantly larger.
Seriously, though. I am glad that Uber is here to disrupt the cab industry, with their dirty cabs, rude drivers, and propensity to hate credit cards.
Basically, under the law, the drone is the same as a full-fledged aircraft. Now, the other side of the equation is that you only own ~100 feet above your property. If it was flying higher, then it is legal.
If it was lower, then it's a different story. In any event, the most prudent course is to call the cops - anything else would just be an overkill, and even if you were in the right, it's just a pain.
You could probably still be subjected to civil suits and what not.
As a pilot, I cannot agree more. Some of the cockpit controls out there are downright obnoxious, especially for rotary wing.
I have a friend who is a Harrier jet pilot, and I have heard some horror stories on landing those on aircraft carriers.
Usually, we are told what *not* to do, and so unless explicitly forbidden (e.g., do not do X before this time), we will assume it will be alright. This is clearly an engineering and a documentation/training failure.
It's easy to blame the pilot, but if anything, he's a tragic victim of poor design.
For me, "performance," is where the act meets the audience as much as where the act is carried-out...
Well, then. We should all adopt your definition of the term. There's a reason art is subjective - as long as the consumer and the producer agree that it's a performance, it doesn't matter what you or the dictionary call it.
I see a lot of people getting very passionate when they're probably not terribly knowledgeable about the situation.
Evidently, that includes you.
I don't know what the man's warrants are for, though given the culture surrounding rap and hip-hop I'm guessing that they're not for the same kinds of things that Edward Snowden is wanted for.
His warrants are for missing child support payments. And btw, that's the whole idea behind free speech -- all speech, good, bad, and ugly, is worth protecting.
You are now conflating freedom with intent and quality, which is a slippery slope.
He's a Thiel Fellow, and clearly, that model is working for kids like him who are super gifted for whom the current college education model would be absurd.
I think that Harvard attracts some of the the world's best and the brightest, especially in the sciences. While MIT has engineering and applied science departments, Harvard has pretty robust physical sciences and life sciences departments, and is trying to grow its engineering schools.
To me, this is a good thing. And I am of the belief that the problems of humanity are going to be solved through science. As much as I would like to think that global warming could be addressed through policy, a technical solution that can cool down the planet would be much preferable (and realistic). Similarly, imagine cheap and easily available food sources, simple water purifiers, cures for AIDS and cancer, space flight and so on.
The truth is, investing in the future of science and engineering at one of the world's top schools is one of the best investments one can ever make.
If anything, Paulson should be lauded -- he is not throwing his money away at non-profits with fat bureaucratic administrations to address short-term solutions. He is investing in the future. The majority of the money will go towards equipment, paying faculty, and graduate students. How is this not a fantastic thing?
471 million potatos is a lot of potatos. 471 million.2mm bits of plastic is enough to cover in plastic all of the living rooms in California. Wait - no - one living room. Or about a dinner-plates worth a day.
Every day. That's the difference.
Even assuming that it's a dinner plate sized amount of pollution, over two decades, you are looking at 7300 dinner plates. Only, broken into little chunks, easily consumed by aquatic life and smothering plants, clogging pipes etc.
What rubbish. Plenty of cultures have parents who are involved in their children's education. My own parents were extremely involved, and as the only child, they put a lot of time and effort into my education and extracurricular activities. To this day, they are quite interested in my career, and are just as involved in teaching my own year old language and music.
That is not a statement on their children's capabilities. Tiger moms are common, and it just demonstrates responsible parents who are genuinely interested in their kids' well being.
My wife and I will certainly be taking an interest in our kids' education and lives, and that is not being overprotective -- that is good parenting.
Some of the greatest minds have been interested in seemingly trivial and popular problems (e.g., Richard Feynman).
This is about science and engineering, and whether or not a phenomena can occur, and it's about public's reaction to something that was proven scientifically.
Plus, a lot of Slashdot's readers are American, and some of us are geeks who like -- wait for this -- football!
With the overhanging belly, he is easily 35-40% at least. While the majority of people today are fat (especially in the US), that is not healthy. If anything, until recently, 20-25% used to be average.
Above 25-30% is the fat territory, and that's when you start increasing your risk for heart attacks, diabetes, and strokes. Mr. Goldberg may have had a lot of things going for him, but he is most certainly more than a little overweight.
Assuming he's ~6 feet, I would argue that he is probably ~30-40+ lbs overweight. That is not at all healthy. I'm not arguing everyone should have abs, but there's a happy medium here. Mr. Goldberg is very clearly on the unfortunate side of the medium.
I wish I could mod this comment up. There is nothing more joyful than giving your children the opportunities that you never had, and helping them accomplish their own success.
Slashdot Mirror
"Starvation mode" has been shown to be a myth. It comes down to basic math, calories in vs. calories out.
If you eat less and work out more, you lose weight. You do the opposite, you gain.
There's no way for the body to "magically" get fat when eating less. That violates the laws of thermodynamics. Sure, the rate of how quickly you gain or lose weight may change (e.g., when you eat less or change your macros to consume less sugar, you may find yourself being more lethargic in the short term until you get used to it, and so you will burn fewer calories). Or, as you lose weight, you need fewer calories (because there isn't as much of you to support).
But a calorie is a calorie and reducing ~3500 calories results in about 1lb of weight loss. Is it exactly 3500? No. Why? Because there are so many other variables at play. But is it closer to 3500 than, say, 500 or 10,000? You bet.
I disagree. Given the disproportional representation of Asians in STEM fields, I would say that those affected are mostly college-educated Americans - yes, more white than black, but certainly includes Asians and women.
Obviously, this depends on the location (e.g., more Asians in California and East Coast vs. Midwest), but I think this affects all skilled Americans in IT.
And I think the mistake is in characterizing it as something that only affects white people. It's all about narrative -- bring in other groups, then see the magic unfold.
But Neelix was awesome, right?
Also wanted to add that co-opting the fringe primarily seems to be happening with one party (i.e., the GOP), and that is reflected in the election results.
However, please bear in mind that in terms of political views, the US is also more conservative than the rest of western society.
What is considered left in the US would be considered pretty moderate or even center-right in many parts of the world.
In may ways, co-opting the extreme right (e.g., the tea party) and some of the libertarian values reflect this reality.
It may be what you prefer, but empirical studies of choice have shown that most people's choices fall along a median, and success is often the result of trying to accommodate one side of the median and most of the median.
It's the same with consumer products, and it's the same with elections.
All systems lean towards simplicity, and the more mature a system is (i.e., it's been around for longer), the more strong parties coalesce towards the median.
Two political parties are a sign of a mature democracy.
Look up Anthony Down's median voter theorem.
You know the only thing worse than an Uber driver? A hippie bicyclist complaining about the Uber drivers.
Free market, bro. Surge pricing works because there is a limited availability, high demand, and the company is charging what they can get away with.
Scheduling pickups? As someone who travels every week, I can certainly relate to this. But then what's stopping you from canceling and just paying the $5 fine or whatever? Or what happens if Uber is unable to have a driver pick you up? Given the complexity involved in scheduling systems, they probably find it easier to do "point in time" scheduling, which works for their business model. 80/20, and the number of folks who want to schedule are much, much smaller and the effort required to arrange for it is probably significantly larger.
Seriously, though. I am glad that Uber is here to disrupt the cab industry, with their dirty cabs, rude drivers, and propensity to hate credit cards.
"To all things, there is a time."
- Babylon 5
3-6 years?! For most Indians and Chinese, it's closer to a decade.
Cmd + up/down arrows. Not the best solution, but it works, and after a while, you get used to it!
Gizmodo had an article a while back on this topic.
Is It OK to Shoot Down Your Neighbor's Drone?
Basically, under the law, the drone is the same as a full-fledged aircraft. Now, the other side of the equation is that you only own ~100 feet above your property. If it was flying higher, then it is legal.
If it was lower, then it's a different story. In any event, the most prudent course is to call the cops - anything else would just be an overkill, and even if you were in the right, it's just a pain.
You could probably still be subjected to civil suits and what not.
As a pilot, I cannot agree more. Some of the cockpit controls out there are downright obnoxious, especially for rotary wing.
I have a friend who is a Harrier jet pilot, and I have heard some horror stories on landing those on aircraft carriers.
Usually, we are told what *not* to do, and so unless explicitly forbidden (e.g., do not do X before this time), we will assume it will be alright. This is clearly an engineering and a documentation/training failure.
It's easy to blame the pilot, but if anything, he's a tragic victim of poor design.
Well, then. We should all adopt your definition of the term. There's a reason art is subjective - as long as the consumer and the producer agree that it's a performance, it doesn't matter what you or the dictionary call it.
Evidently, that includes you.
His warrants are for missing child support payments. And btw, that's the whole idea behind free speech -- all speech, good, bad, and ugly, is worth protecting.
You are now conflating freedom with intent and quality, which is a slippery slope.
He's a Thiel Fellow, and clearly, that model is working for kids like him who are super gifted for whom the current college education model would be absurd.
This 17-Year-Old Dropped Out Of High School For Peter Thiel And Built A Game-Changing New Kind Of Computer
Pretty awesome, if you ask me!
And more importantly, all the banks repaid the government the money that they were lent.... ...unlike Greek banks or Greece.
But the food industry has a vested interest in feeding you crap:
The Extraordinary Science of Addictive Junk Food
If everyone ate fruits, veggies, and lean meat, then how can they sell you overpriced sugary crap?
But this comes down to your personal values.
I think that Harvard attracts some of the the world's best and the brightest, especially in the sciences. While MIT has engineering and applied science departments, Harvard has pretty robust physical sciences and life sciences departments, and is trying to grow its engineering schools.
To me, this is a good thing. And I am of the belief that the problems of humanity are going to be solved through science. As much as I would like to think that global warming could be addressed through policy, a technical solution that can cool down the planet would be much preferable (and realistic). Similarly, imagine cheap and easily available food sources, simple water purifiers, cures for AIDS and cancer, space flight and so on.
The truth is, investing in the future of science and engineering at one of the world's top schools is one of the best investments one can ever make.
If anything, Paulson should be lauded -- he is not throwing his money away at non-profits with fat bureaucratic administrations to address short-term solutions. He is investing in the future. The majority of the money will go towards equipment, paying faculty, and graduate students. How is this not a fantastic thing?
It should.
You should read this: 8 Things They Donâ(TM)t Tell You About Horse Racing.
Every day. That's the difference.
Even assuming that it's a dinner plate sized amount of pollution, over two decades, you are looking at 7300 dinner plates. Only, broken into little chunks, easily consumed by aquatic life and smothering plants, clogging pipes etc.
Edge, as in, backbone, edge, and access. Infrastructure folks frequently talk about the edge. Look it up.
And Tech Crunch has a better description of their offering: Druva Wants To Make Backup Tape History By Moving Server Backup To Cloud
What rubbish. Plenty of cultures have parents who are involved in their children's education. My own parents were extremely involved, and as the only child, they put a lot of time and effort into my education and extracurricular activities. To this day, they are quite interested in my career, and are just as involved in teaching my own year old language and music.
That is not a statement on their children's capabilities. Tiger moms are common, and it just demonstrates responsible parents who are genuinely interested in their kids' well being.
My wife and I will certainly be taking an interest in our kids' education and lives, and that is not being overprotective -- that is good parenting.
Some of the greatest minds have been interested in seemingly trivial and popular problems (e.g., Richard Feynman).
This is about science and engineering, and whether or not a phenomena can occur, and it's about public's reaction to something that was proven scientifically.
Plus, a lot of Slashdot's readers are American, and some of us are geeks who like -- wait for this -- football!
While I feel for the family, to say that he is not overweight shows just how much society's perception of being overweight has changed.
Take a look at this picture, for instance.
And take a look at the body fat visual chart for comparison.
With the overhanging belly, he is easily 35-40% at least. While the majority of people today are fat (especially in the US), that is not healthy. If anything, until recently, 20-25% used to be average.
Above 25-30% is the fat territory, and that's when you start increasing your risk for heart attacks, diabetes, and strokes. Mr. Goldberg may have had a lot of things going for him, but he is most certainly more than a little overweight.
Assuming he's ~6 feet, I would argue that he is probably ~30-40+ lbs overweight. That is not at all healthy. I'm not arguing everyone should have abs, but there's a happy medium here. Mr. Goldberg is very clearly on the unfortunate side of the medium.
And why would that be?
Not everyone is wired the same way, and some of the greatest contributors to science did it out of curiosity rather than goodwill.
Personally, I think the H.L. Mencken quote sums it all up rather well.
I wish I could mod this comment up. There is nothing more joyful than giving your children the opportunities that you never had, and helping them accomplish their own success.