If you are diabetic, you need to understand the sugar issue much more in depth than any of this.
Also, I was not suggesting replacing your pop intake with Tang or some shit. Fruit juice is good for you, certainly better than pop. Especially if it's just juice, no preservatives or added sugar or concentrated.
I didn't even want to head in that direction as it's even worse what people can convince themselves of.
Think about who drinks diet pop. People that understand that large amounts of sugar is bad. So what do they look for? Something that is the same, but not as bad for you. (In that one particular area)
Stop...the point was almost missed there.
What is Pop? It's essentially liquid sugar.
What does it take to come to this realization, and then decide that drinking pop itself isn't the problem, it's the sugar. (Remember, there really is no difference)
What brings people to even _want_ to drink pop when they've realized the sugar is bad for them? What's left? Just don't drink the shit.
Nothing good can come from trying to find a replacement for sugar so that you can consume disgustingly huge amounts of guilt free.
Just quit drinking pop. Switch to carbonated water if it's the fizz you like. Switch to natural fruit juices if sweetness is your thing. Switch to coffee or tea if caffeine is your thing. Just drop the refined sugars instead of looking for a replacement. And if that seems unreasonable, I strongly suggest you think about _why_ you need that sugar, OR the replacement, in the first place.
I think I can guess the physiology and preferred drink of at least one mod around here.
I know this is/., and this will be modded into oblivion for daring to speak up, but sheesh.
Moderation is not provided to push your personal agenda or attempting to censor information you do not agree with.
Please note that I did not say that anyone in particular is fat, or drinks too much pop. In other words I am accusing no one of anything. So if I hurt your feelings, there is probably a reason for that which has absolutely nothing to do with me.
It's sad really that not only do some people not like the truth, that they would also like to try to stop others from hearing the truth.
And I'm sorry, but these are indesputable facts. (Notice how there are no contradictory replies? Only lame moderation? That says a lot)
So again, I'm sorry if it offends you but these things are true: Pop is bad for you. Pop can make you fat. If you weigh 300lbs and go through a case of pop a week, you may wish to take this information and do something with it. Or not. Whatever.
I really feel for the obese kids though. It is not their fault. So even if you won't address the problem yourself, PLEASE don't condone it in your children. Kids will grow up plenty happy if all they ever drink is milk juice and water.
Yeah, and the trend towards bigger serving sizes and the general increased consumption of pop has nothing to do with it.
When I was a kid, pop was a rare treat. I still to this day rarely drink the crap. And I'm quite healthy.
The people I know around my age that either have been drinking pop very regularly since they were kids, or whom now drink a few pops a day are almost invariably obese.
Even worse though are the number of kids you see today that are a) obese and b) have a can of pop permanently attached to them.
It only takes common sense to see the obvious correlation. Large amounts of liquid sugar are not good for us. It does not matter one little bit where the sugar is derived from.
Heck, beer is down right healthy for you compared to pop.
You're sort of correct. The act of lying isn't an explicit right, but because it involves 'speech', it does fall under free speech.
However, lying is quite often explicitly illegal. As mentioned, it is illegal when under oath (perjury). Fraud is lying. Pretty much any time you lie with the intent of gaining something it is illegal.
You have a very interesting view on the world. Too bad it's not based in reality.
I get the impression that you have done some really stupid things in your time that you really _really_ hope never get out in the open. Too bad. You do something stupid, than do another stupid thing by telling the whole world, and then expect to be able to revoke that information on a whim?
You sir are on crack.
My biggest problem though is that you're not the only one, and you're pissing in my pool.
Kindly quit pissing in my pool. Personally, I'm quite attached to that picture of you and your dog. (Nudge nudge). Don't worry though, I'll respect your _copyright_ to that image. I won't sell it to anyone.
Fuck off, jesus fucking christ. That's the problem with people like you. You keep bringing up some minor point to frame your major point, but the minor point is WAY OFF BASE.
Who the fuck brought up teenage pregnancy? Who the fuck turned this conversation into pregnancy prevention? Who suggested that that is anyones goal except for yours?
What if I believe we should be fucking and procreating like freaking rabbits?
FUCK I'm sick of this kind of bullshit surrounding IP and the internet.
If you put it on the internet, and you provide open access to it, What the FUCK do you want?
That's the same today as it was in 99 and hopefully the way it always will be.
Just because these assholes fucked up 6 years ago is absolutely NO reason to suddenly change the way things work.
And why your fucking post got +4 insightful for regurgitating a blatant piece of FUD I'll never know.
Robots.txt has NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS, other than being a nice thing that some crawling sites like the archive and google tend to abide by. But it is NOT LEGALLY BINDING. It is simply a REQUEST.
Now quit pissing on my fucking rights you asshole.
If it wasn't TABOO they wouldn't even blink at crap like this.
It is purely because sex is TABOO in north america that teenagers migrate so much towards sex.
Teenagers are programmed to do one thing well, break rules. Push the boundaries. What's the biggest boundary presented to teenagers in north america? Yeah, you've got it.
Ignorance is bliss, until your teenager comes home knocked up.
Nudity is our natural state, get over it. Fucking is why we are here, get over it. Trying to change or hide these pure truths does absoltely NOTHING but cause problems.
Think about this for a second: Why is it OK to put videos of someones horny chihuahua attempting to mate with a saint bernard on a family oriented home video show, and yet god forbid the children are exposed to a freaking _breast_ for fucks sakes.
(Think about that point in particular, it's mind boggling what we do to children. You're born, you're stuck on a breast immediately, and from then on society attempts to beat 'breasts are bad' into said child for the rest of their lives. Talk about a psychological cluster fuck or what!)
Id arguably peaked with Quake II in terms of pure enjoyment to play, especially multiplayer.
Quake III was prettier but nowhere near as responsive. It was good, but not the same, and not better really despite the major engine overhaul and drastic change in focus. Pretty much all just stand alone arenas. Yes, I know that was the point, but for me this is where they started to miss the point.
Doom III took everything they did wrong with Quake III and then some and forced it onto a single player game. It was certainly NOT like anything tried and true Id had produced before. It wasn't Doomlike in how it played. It also wasn't like most other current FPS'. It's just not that good, that's all.
Somewhere the shift went from making greatly enjoyable games to making candy filled games.
Yes, very cool to you and apparently about a dozen other slashdotters. You're still missing my point.
It would have been _way_ cooler 15 years ago.
If this energy today was instead put into hacking a game api into some modern device that everyone has _now_, that would not only be geekily cool, it would also potentially be useful, or at least used.
Anyways, not trying to detract from your enjoyment of this. Have fun!
If we follow your logic, books like Code Complete are useless because we should already know this stuff before we need it. (huh?)
Glad your brain is that big. Me, I rather fully appreciate this all too rare level of detail being made available. C should not be a black art, there is no reason for it to be.
As for your statement about the appropriateness of even knowing/using C, I simply must protest. ALL of the good programmers I know have a background that includes C, whether they program in VB/C#/Java Whatever. It is proven to be highly beneficial to know what's going on under the hood.
I've seen _way_ too many 'programmers' that do not have this background and suffer hugely from it when it matters.
I was replying to another post that noticed that oddity. I was only commenting on the oddity itself as I find it interesting how things get moderated sometimes.
I wasn't bitching about said moderation though. All the power to him for getting those 6 lousy karma points. I was just making an observation.
My point is hacking something old like this really has nothing more than nostalgia and geek factor attached to it. Had this come out when I was in high school, it would have been something to talk about.
Shit, it would have drawn all KINDS of people towards playing with programming for the 2600.
No one is going to suddenly be drawn to programming because this came along now. Very few people will ever play anything produced using this. Very little of what is learned in making a game using these tools will be applicable to creating games for modern systems.
At this point, it only exists for the sake of doing it in the first place. If that gets the people involved off, that's great! Truly, it is! However, _I'm_ not about to start jumping up and down about it.
Just because that may have impacted why they were originally made that way, does NOT remove the other reasons why a round manhole cover is a good design.
Think laterally about this: Pretend for the sake of argument that back in the 1890's it was actually easier to produce square manholes. Would we still be using them? (Not sure) Would they be better than a round one? (Certainly not) I would expect that had that been the case, the first design would NOT have been the last design, as it wouldn't have been the best design. As it turns out, we hit on the best design first go, whether intentionally or as a side effect of the technologies available at the time.
Just because intrinsic benefits of a design weren't noticed when something was developed does not negate said benefits.
You're entirely wrong. This _only_ works with a circle.
Ceiling tiles are most certainly NOT square for the same reason, otherwise it would be impossible to install them from underneath.
Ceiling tiles are square (or rectangular) because we build spaces that are square (or rectangular), and as such are most easily divided into smaller squares (or rectangles) of equal dimensions.
Slashdot Mirror
I see that you aren't a fan of the tooth brush, enjoy cancer, and have issues with moderation*.
/.)
To each their own!
(* That would be as in 'consuming in moderation' as opposed to the act of moderating posts on
If you are diabetic, you need to understand the sugar issue much more in depth than any of this.
Also, I was not suggesting replacing your pop intake with Tang or some shit. Fruit juice is good for you, certainly better than pop. Especially if it's just juice, no preservatives or added sugar or concentrated.
Even still, Everything In Moderation!
Are you really going to try to compare a glass of OJ to a can of pop?
Do I really have to get in to the details here?
Come on now, that's just absurd.
I didn't even want to head in that direction as it's even worse what people can convince themselves of.
Think about who drinks diet pop. People that understand that large amounts of sugar is bad. So what do they look for? Something that is the same, but not as bad for you. (In that one particular area)
Stop...the point was almost missed there.
What is Pop?
It's essentially liquid sugar.
What does it take to come to this realization, and then decide that drinking pop itself isn't the problem, it's the sugar. (Remember, there really is no difference)
What brings people to even _want_ to drink pop when they've realized the sugar is bad for them? What's left? Just don't drink the shit.
Nothing good can come from trying to find a replacement for sugar so that you can consume disgustingly huge amounts of guilt free.
Just quit drinking pop. Switch to carbonated water if it's the fizz you like. Switch to natural fruit juices if sweetness is your thing. Switch to coffee or tea if caffeine is your thing. Just drop the refined sugars instead of looking for a replacement. And if that seems unreasonable, I strongly suggest you think about _why_ you need that sugar, OR the replacement, in the first place.
Hmm, interesting.
/., and this will be modded into oblivion for daring to speak up, but sheesh.
Modded overrated for stating facts.
I think I can guess the physiology and preferred drink of at least one mod around here.
I know this is
Moderation is not provided to push your personal agenda or attempting to censor information you do not agree with.
Please note that I did not say that anyone in particular is fat, or drinks too much pop. In other words I am accusing no one of anything. So if I hurt your feelings, there is probably a reason for that which has absolutely nothing to do with me.
It's sad really that not only do some people not like the truth, that they would also like to try to stop others from hearing the truth.
And I'm sorry, but these are indesputable facts. (Notice how there are no contradictory replies? Only lame moderation? That says a lot)
So again, I'm sorry if it offends you but these things are true: Pop is bad for you. Pop can make you fat. If you weigh 300lbs and go through a case of pop a week, you may wish to take this information and do something with it. Or not. Whatever.
I really feel for the obese kids though. It is not their fault. So even if you won't address the problem yourself, PLEASE don't condone it in your children. Kids will grow up plenty happy if all they ever drink is milk juice and water.
Yes, and that picture was already used to counter that statement at that time.
Nothing new to see, please move along.
And at that point, there will certainly be an obesity problem regardless of which sweetener is used.
Yeah, and the trend towards bigger serving sizes and the general increased consumption of pop has nothing to do with it.
When I was a kid, pop was a rare treat. I still to this day rarely drink the crap. And I'm quite healthy.
The people I know around my age that either have been drinking pop very regularly since they were kids, or whom now drink a few pops a day are almost invariably obese.
Even worse though are the number of kids you see today that are a) obese and b) have a can of pop permanently attached to them.
It only takes common sense to see the obvious correlation. Large amounts of liquid sugar are not good for us. It does not matter one little bit where the sugar is derived from.
Heck, beer is down right healthy for you compared to pop.
You're sort of correct. The act of lying isn't an explicit right, but because it involves 'speech', it does fall under free speech.
However, lying is quite often explicitly illegal. As mentioned, it is illegal when under oath (perjury). Fraud is lying. Pretty much any time you lie with the intent of gaining something it is illegal.
As such, I wouldn't exactly call lying a right.
You have a very interesting view on the world.
Too bad it's not based in reality.
I get the impression that you have done some really stupid things in your time that you really _really_ hope never get out in the open. Too bad. You do something stupid, than do another stupid thing by telling the whole world, and then expect to be able to revoke that information on a whim?
You sir are on crack.
My biggest problem though is that you're not the only one, and you're pissing in my pool.
Kindly quit pissing in my pool. Personally, I'm quite attached to that picture of you and your dog. (Nudge nudge). Don't worry though, I'll respect your _copyright_ to that image. I won't sell it to anyone.
Too bad that as soon as you put up a publicly accessible website you've distributed it to the entire world.
That would be the freaking point.
Fuck off, jesus fucking christ. That's the problem with people like you. You keep bringing up some minor point to frame your major point, but the minor point is WAY OFF BASE.
Who the fuck brought up teenage pregnancy? Who the fuck turned this conversation into pregnancy prevention? Who suggested that that is anyones goal except for yours?
What if I believe we should be fucking and procreating like freaking rabbits?
Fucking one trick pony.
FUCK I'm sick of this kind of bullshit surrounding IP and the internet.
If you put it on the internet, and you provide open access to it, What the FUCK do you want?
That's the same today as it was in 99 and hopefully the way it always will be.
Just because these assholes fucked up 6 years ago is absolutely NO reason to suddenly change the way things work.
And why your fucking post got +4 insightful for regurgitating a blatant piece of FUD I'll never know.
Robots.txt has NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS, other than being a nice thing that some crawling sites like the archive and google tend to abide by. But it is NOT LEGALLY BINDING. It is simply a REQUEST.
Now quit pissing on my fucking rights you asshole.
If it wasn't TABOO they wouldn't even blink at crap like this.
It is purely because sex is TABOO in north america that teenagers migrate so much towards sex.
Teenagers are programmed to do one thing well, break rules. Push the boundaries. What's the biggest boundary presented to teenagers in north america? Yeah, you've got it.
Ignorance is bliss, until your teenager comes home knocked up.
Nudity is our natural state, get over it.
Fucking is why we are here, get over it.
Trying to change or hide these pure truths does absoltely NOTHING but cause problems.
Think about this for a second: Why is it OK to put videos of someones horny chihuahua attempting to mate with a saint bernard on a family oriented home video show, and yet god forbid the children are exposed to a freaking _breast_ for fucks sakes.
(Think about that point in particular, it's mind boggling what we do to children. You're born, you're stuck on a breast immediately, and from then on society attempts to beat 'breasts are bad' into said child for the rest of their lives. Talk about a psychological cluster fuck or what!)
Id arguably peaked with Quake II in terms of pure enjoyment to play, especially multiplayer.
Quake III was prettier but nowhere near as responsive. It was good, but not the same, and not better really despite the major engine overhaul and drastic change in focus. Pretty much all just stand alone arenas. Yes, I know that was the point, but for me this is where they started to miss the point.
Doom III took everything they did wrong with Quake III and then some and forced it onto a single player game. It was certainly NOT like anything tried and true Id had produced before. It wasn't Doomlike in how it played. It also wasn't like most other current FPS'. It's just not that good, that's all.
Somewhere the shift went from making greatly enjoyable games to making candy filled games.
Yes, very cool to you and apparently about a dozen other slashdotters. You're still missing my point.
It would have been _way_ cooler 15 years ago.
If this energy today was instead put into hacking a game api into some modern device that everyone has _now_, that would not only be geekily cool, it would also potentially be useful, or at least used.
Anyways, not trying to detract from your enjoyment of this. Have fun!
Ah, yes, you would be quite correct. Good point. It won't fall through.
It's not as easy as a circle to orient correctly though, so circle still wins in my book for this particular application.
Preaching to the choir man :)
Chicken or egg man?
If we follow your logic, books like Code Complete are useless because we should already know this stuff before we need it. (huh?)
Glad your brain is that big.
Me, I rather fully appreciate this all too rare level of detail being made available. C should not be a black art, there is no reason for it to be.
As for your statement about the appropriateness of even knowing/using C, I simply must protest. ALL of the good programmers I know have a background that includes C, whether they program in VB/C#/Java Whatever. It is proven to be highly beneficial to know what's going on under the hood.
I've seen _way_ too many 'programmers' that do not have this background and suffer hugely from it when it matters.
I was replying to another post that noticed that oddity. I was only commenting on the oddity itself as I find it interesting how things get moderated sometimes.
I wasn't bitching about said moderation though. All the power to him for getting those 6 lousy karma points. I was just making an observation.
Whatever is right.
No, I do get it actually.
My point is hacking something old like this really has nothing more than nostalgia and geek factor attached to it. Had this come out when I was in high school, it would have been something to talk about.
Shit, it would have drawn all KINDS of people towards playing with programming for the 2600.
No one is going to suddenly be drawn to programming because this came along now. Very few people will ever play anything produced using this. Very little of what is learned in making a game using these tools will be applicable to creating games for modern systems.
At this point, it only exists for the sake of doing it in the first place. If that gets the people involved off, that's great! Truly, it is! However, _I'm_ not about to start jumping up and down about it.
Yes, but is that a better design?
Doesn't really sound like it.
Just because that may have impacted why they were originally made that way, does NOT remove the other reasons why a round manhole cover is a good design.
Think laterally about this:
Pretend for the sake of argument that back in the 1890's it was actually easier to produce square manholes.
Would we still be using them? (Not sure)
Would they be better than a round one? (Certainly not)
I would expect that had that been the case, the first design would NOT have been the last design, as it wouldn't have been the best design. As it turns out, we hit on the best design first go, whether intentionally or as a side effect of the technologies available at the time.
Just because intrinsic benefits of a design weren't noticed when something was developed does not negate said benefits.
Think about it. Rotate that triangular cover in your mind. Whoosh, there it goes!
It will most certainly fit through the hole.
You're entirely wrong. This _only_ works with a circle.
Ceiling tiles are most certainly NOT square for the same reason, otherwise it would be impossible to install them from underneath.
Ceiling tiles are square (or rectangular) because we build spaces that are square (or rectangular), and as such are most easily divided into smaller squares (or rectangles) of equal dimensions.