Well, the argument is that our society is fundamentally better than others on the planet because we support the kinds of rights that make innovation prosper. A free press, the ability to easily incorporate, easy access to loans... Couple this with our gee-whiz universities that think themselves the bastion of all knowledge and research.
The PROBLEM is that all these things are slowly disappearing. The gee-whiz universities that come up with the innovative ideas? The actual product of those ideas are produced in cheap-labor economies. Eventually the "locals" catch on -- this is what happened in Japan when we had them building our TV sets and telecommunications devices. Eventually they figure out how to do it themselves, and suddenly our domestic manufacturing goes out of business. "Oh well," we say to ourselves, "at least we've got XXXXX."
As in, "Oh well, at least we own the auto industry." Not any more. "Oh well, at least we own the manufacturing tools industry (production line machinary)." Not any more. "Oh well, at least we own the telecommunications industry." Not any more. "Oh well, at least we own the software industry..." Well, not for much longer. And what's left? The only jobs remaining are the ones that require a physical human presence.
So, you need the guy to unload the cargo shipment from China. You need the salesperson to sell you the new gee-whiz gadget (imported, of course). Or sell you your hamburgers, which, surprise, are made from imported beef because it's cheaper.
And don't get me started on the other aspects of our country that will "save us." Free press? That's gone the way of the Dodo bird, thanks to media conglomerates like FOX and relaxed FCC restrictions on local station ownership.
How about our easily incorporated companies? Good luck finding anyone to put any money it them. And good luck coming up with an idea that isn't instantly sued into oblivion thanks to our asinine intellectual property laws. Instead what you'll have is a great idea that's either bought out by a bigger fish, or simply stolen by them. But our lawyers will save us, right? Our giant army of lawyers? Don't count on it.
Just about the only thing left for our country to do is dump money into military spending. If we can't out-think you, or out-democracy you, well, we can just out-bomb your sorry ass.
If you ask me, India is looking a lot like we used to look like, back before the "American Dream" turned into a nightmare.
Look, I hate the iPod-People as much as the next guy, but let's be honest, here.
The unit you linked to is only smaller because they've put the entire display on a separate "remote" unit. That sucks. From an engineering point of view, you want to minimize all ways in which to break the thing -- having a dedicated wired-remote doubles these chances. And look at the weakest link in the chain -- the cable from the remote to the unit -- if anything happens to that cable (stretched, yanked, sliced or diced) or the plug on the end, there goes your fancy display.
Never mind that it's encased in aluminum. The cord isn't.
If they had put the display in the unit, it would be near-perfect. If they added a 1/8" optical-TOSLINK connection to either the unit itself, or the base, that would be perfect. Who wants a line-audio copy of a CD? Digital, man!
For the life of me I can't figure out why no one has offered a headunit that supports USB jump drives.
They're so damned ubiquitous nowadays -- just a single USB port to plug in media -- a card reader (for CompactFlash cards), a jump drive, etc. Let the end-user deal with buying the storage, I just want a unit that PLAYS what I put into it.
Is this REALLY TO MUCH TO ASK FOR??
I've seen a grand total of ONE manufacturer that has a unit with a USB input, and it goes for over $3000. And there's no internal amp.
Everyone gets all up in arms when some big mean company tries to restrict 802.11b, [...] but when the *movie theaters* start jamming cell phone tranmissions, it's suddenly a great idea? I don't get it.
Don't be so damned obtuse. Of course you "get it." Cell phones make noise. The wireless aether doesn't.
Now, if people started bringing their PDA's along with them to theaters to play loud or obnoxious games on them while paying customers were trying to watch a movie, you can be sure they'd try and block 802.11b as well.
Don't like it? Tough shit. Why not encourage a whole new line of theaters that are "cell phone friendly" to give your patronage to?
Most photogs I know are wary of selling photos of buildings without expressed permission, but it is in fact completely legal.
According to the Copyright Act (1976), Section 120(a) -- Scope of exclusive rights in architectural works
(a) Pictorial representations permitted.
The copyright in an architectural work that has been constructed does not include the right to prevent the making, distributing, or public display of pictures, paintings, photographs, or other pictorial representations of the work, if the building in which the work is embodied is located in or ordinarily visible from a public place. (emphasis mine)
I realize that they are lining their pockets and fleecing the artists, but at a certain point (and 95% shutting down seems like that kind of point) it stops making sense to continue business.
You don't need a record company to make an album. Get a bunch of guys together and record it at home -- heck, download the multi-track software for free on your favorite p2p app and mix the music yourself. Then spread the music through the web. If people like it, they might buy an "album" that has some value-added benefit, or do what they did in the OLD days:
Go see a live show.
Oh, but that involves actually being able to perform, and possibly even play your own instruments. Frankly, the only people I see that are really going to be hurt by this are all the corporate pop "divas" and hit-of-the-hour type crapola that pollutes the air waves thanks to the juggernaut of corporate media shoving it down our throats. Go and see a live band, give them your money directly.
If a jam band from Vermont could make a mint doing it, I'm not too worried about the death of music any time soon.
As an author, I wonder how much of your valued craft was honed by reading the work of others for education and inspiration. How many books did you buy in elementary school, or high school? Yet that's where you learned your precious language skills you now market.
Knowledge, even the limited knowledge of an author, does not exist in a vacuum. You read, you learn, you practice, then you create. You could not have done this without the beneficence of others who aren't making a dime off the education they provided you.
To unleash the vast amounts of knowledge stored up in the LOC to the world would be one of the single best things this country could do for mankind. One book, one reader my hairy ass. Why not open the floodgates so everyone can benefit?
I understand the motivation of monetary incentives, but I also know a lot of great authors who died penniless. And they were at least brave enough to sign their names to their ideas.
Can any photography buffs out there see themselves using something like this? A step up from the storage bricks I could imagine.
Not really. There are a lot of reasons, perhaps most importantly, there's not likely to be a RAW converter built into it, which means that I can only see the JPG's I shoot. If I want to look a the images, I have to either dump it to a laptop or use my camera. So that fancy screen doesn't do me a whole heck of a lot of good. Why not just save a step (and some cash?)
As for the cost savings over CF cards -- well, I can get two or three two-gig cards for that much money. How many shots would I take for an assignment? Maybe 2000-3000 max. So I don't really need the off-storage capacity unless it's all RAW files (which take up more space), but then we're back to problem #1.
The last big issue is transfer speed. Most photo-banks like this have terrible write speeds -- 10 minutes for a 512 meg card is not unusual. There are dedicated image "tank" solutions designed for photographers that have 10 MB/s transfer speeds already -- and cost half the price.
Just about the only reason a photographer would use one is to listen to MP3's while shooting, but again, there are better solutions already out there for this.
This would be a nice little unit for travel -- though most long airplane rides already offer your own little screen with a choice of movies. Basically your target audience is someone who rides the bus a lot -- unfortunately, not the sort of demographic that has $800 of discretionary income to spend on a gadget.
If you were to "meet" the trash you threw out in orbit, it might be moving at significant velocity, but then, so are you, right? I mean, if something moving at 17,000 miles per hour hits something moving in the same direction at 17,002 miles per hour, it's not the end of the world, is it?
It's not like you're you've got to dig a Tostitos bag from out of your cranium.
if they go on spacewalk in order to heave it behind (relative to orbital path) the station, the station will pick up orbital speed and the trash will loose orbital speed
...but in throwing the trash, the astronauts overexert themselves, requiring more water and food, and breathing much harder. So they'll use less fuel of the "rocket" variety, but require more fuel of the "human" variety.
Remember, energy cannot be created or destroyed, just transferred. Or, "You can't get sumthin' for nuthin'"
many people, if pressed to do so, would agree that the world is at least a little bit safer without Saddam Hussein in charge in Iraq, regardless of whether he had any WMD
I don't know. I think the world would be a safer place if we put him back in charge. He was doing a fine job at keeping all the different extremist religious groups in check. Now it's hell-in-a-handbasket over there. Know how many Americans Saddam killed in the past decade? None. Now he's gone and we're past 1,000 casualties.
Of course, I suppose you could argue that the "world" might not be safer, but at least the Iraqi people are. Not these Iraqis, for course.
Again, it is a staple in Asian diets. Not brown rice, either. And I don't think it's simply a matter of smaller portions or genetics -- when I lived in Asia I didn't notice the portions being significantly smaller than what I eat now. Why wouldn't we see a large amount of diabetes sufferers in the Asian population if white rice was so bad for the human body?
I fixed my propane BBQ
Mmmmm... ribs. You do know that meats wreak havoc on your digestive system, and in large quantities contribute to heart disease (though eating lean meats, as you mention, can avoid this), diabetes and gout.
So you know, I'm a carnivore and always will be. But let's not kid ourselves: if you just ate soy, vegetables and fruits for the rest of your life, you'd probably be much healthier overall (but a lot more miserable).
Genetics: I haven't seen very many fat Asian-Americans either.
I don't think genetics is an issue here. Obesity levels in Asia are growing in proportion to the level of western (specifically, American) influence. So while there isn't an epidemic of obesity in China, there is a growing problem in Japan.
Obesity is on the rise in Japan as they have been adopting more "American" eating habits. In conjunction with weight, there has been a dramatic increase in diabetes and cardiovascular disease. Extremely dramatic. This isn't because the genetic structure of Japanese people has changed in the last 20 years.
You're always eating plenty of meats and vegetables to go along with it.
That's true. Unfortunately, even reasonably sane portions of rice that an average meal might contain would be a big no-no in the Atkins plan.
As for the lack of exercise, maybe we should adjust our eating habits to our lifestyle, instead of adjusting our lifestyle to our eating habits.
Well, we really should be attacking it from both ends, don't you think? Our lifestyle has changed dramatically over the past hundred years -- we walk less, sit for far longer periods of time -- but our bodies haven't changed substantially. While you're right in saying that there's no need for 3500 calorie diets when all you do is drive and sit all day, there is still a fundemental requirement of movement if you expect your body to be reasonably fit.
If I did nothing all day, but ate properly, my muscles would still atrophie. The human body needs a modicum of exertion just to maintain homeostasis. When the most exercise you get in your day is when you're brushing your teeth, you're going to have problems.
Bless Iowa City, the best city of its size in the Midwest.
That's amazing -- when I drove from Boston to Nebraska, I stopped in Iowa City and there actually was one decent coffee place in town that everyone recommended. It was the only good coffee on the entire trip.
Please don't get me wrong by the title of my post. You had a lot of good things to say, particularly about the unnecessary addition of sugar in foods where sugar has no place being in the first place.
But sugar and "carbs" are not the problem. The lack of exercise it the problem. Our entire society is structured in such a way as to make regular, daily exercise impossible. Perfect example: the suburbs. Ever notice why people in cities are generally thinner than people out in the 'burbs? Because they WALK MORE. Argh.
No matter how you feel about no- or low-carb diets like atkins (which is just a new name on an old diet, which can be referred to as a low-carb modified fast) the fact is that we eat too many carbohydrates.
Ok, then. Can you please explain something to me. It's just something that's been bothering me about all these Atkins ditto-heads.
Ok, here goes. You ready?
Asian People.
Ever been to Asia? Because there aren't a lot of fat people there. It's actually amazing! A place where the PRIMARY FOOD SOURCE is RICE, (a carbohydrate!) and yet there is no epidemic of obesity like there is in the States.
Sorry to hear about your plight, but it could be worse...
I live in "God's Country" (place your finger in the middle of the U.S. -- that's about where I am) and I have the opposite problem -- nobody has cream here.
Now, I started drinking coffee in the Italian area of Boston. I can't stand not having cream in my coffee. And out here, I'm literally surrounded by cows, but everyone insists on putting this "Creamer" stuff in their coffee. Creamer can be left open, in a warm room, for months and not go bad. It's simply not from this earth.
These fat slobs (some of the fattest in the nation!) would super-size their ASPIRIN if they had the chance, but "oh no, cream is too filling!" Gah!
And naturally nobody has ever heard of SUGAR. No, it's all artificial, carcinogenic "sweeteners". Most of the people just drink Foldgers instant-coffee, anyway. Mixed to half-strength.
If you're ever in the Mid-West, just remember that "coffee" means "slightly brown-tinted water with artifical sweeteners and fake milk."
Slashdot Mirror
What so special about USA brains.
Well, the argument is that our society is fundamentally better than others on the planet because we support the kinds of rights that make innovation prosper. A free press, the ability to easily incorporate, easy access to loans... Couple this with our gee-whiz universities that think themselves the bastion of all knowledge and research.
The PROBLEM is that all these things are slowly disappearing. The gee-whiz universities that come up with the innovative ideas? The actual product of those ideas are produced in cheap-labor economies. Eventually the "locals" catch on -- this is what happened in Japan when we had them building our TV sets and telecommunications devices. Eventually they figure out how to do it themselves, and suddenly our domestic manufacturing goes out of business. "Oh well," we say to ourselves, "at least we've got XXXXX."
As in, "Oh well, at least we own the auto industry." Not any more. "Oh well, at least we own the manufacturing tools industry (production line machinary)." Not any more. "Oh well, at least we own the telecommunications industry." Not any more. "Oh well, at least we own the software industry..." Well, not for much longer. And what's left? The only jobs remaining are the ones that require a physical human presence.
So, you need the guy to unload the cargo shipment from China. You need the salesperson to sell you the new gee-whiz gadget (imported, of course). Or sell you your hamburgers, which, surprise, are made from imported beef because it's cheaper.
And don't get me started on the other aspects of our country that will "save us." Free press? That's gone the way of the Dodo bird, thanks to media conglomerates like FOX and relaxed FCC restrictions on local station ownership.
How about our easily incorporated companies? Good luck finding anyone to put any money it them. And good luck coming up with an idea that isn't instantly sued into oblivion thanks to our asinine intellectual property laws. Instead what you'll have is a great idea that's either bought out by a bigger fish, or simply stolen by them. But our lawyers will save us, right? Our giant army of lawyers? Don't count on it.
Just about the only thing left for our country to do is dump money into military spending. If we can't out-think you, or out-democracy you, well, we can just out-bomb your sorry ass.
If you ask me, India is looking a lot like we used to look like, back before the "American Dream" turned into a nightmare.
Look, I hate the iPod-People as much as the next guy, but let's be honest, here.
The unit you linked to is only smaller because they've put the entire display on a separate "remote" unit. That sucks. From an engineering point of view, you want to minimize all ways in which to break the thing -- having a dedicated wired-remote doubles these chances. And look at the weakest link in the chain -- the cable from the remote to the unit -- if anything happens to that cable (stretched, yanked, sliced or diced) or the plug on the end, there goes your fancy display.
Never mind that it's encased in aluminum. The cord isn't.
If they had put the display in the unit, it would be near-perfect. If they added a 1/8" optical-TOSLINK connection to either the unit itself, or the base, that would be perfect. Who wants a line-audio copy of a CD? Digital, man!
That's exactly what I was looking for! Thanks!
For the life of me I can't figure out why no one has offered a headunit that supports USB jump drives.
They're so damned ubiquitous nowadays -- just a single USB port to plug in media -- a card reader (for CompactFlash cards), a jump drive, etc. Let the end-user deal with buying the storage, I just want a unit that PLAYS what I put into it.
Is this REALLY TO MUCH TO ASK FOR??
I've seen a grand total of ONE manufacturer that has a unit with a USB input, and it goes for over $3000. And there's no internal amp.
Everyone gets all up in arms when some big mean company tries to restrict 802.11b, [...] but when the *movie theaters* start jamming cell phone tranmissions, it's suddenly a great idea? I don't get it.
Don't be so damned obtuse. Of course you "get it." Cell phones make noise. The wireless aether doesn't.
Now, if people started bringing their PDA's along with them to theaters to play loud or obnoxious games on them while paying customers were trying to watch a movie, you can be sure they'd try and block 802.11b as well.
Don't like it? Tough shit. Why not encourage a whole new line of theaters that are "cell phone friendly" to give your patronage to?
Most photogs I know are wary of selling photos of buildings without expressed permission, but it is in fact completely legal.
According to the Copyright Act (1976), Section 120(a) -- Scope of exclusive rights in architectural works
(a) Pictorial representations permitted.
The copyright in an architectural work that has been constructed does not include the right to prevent the making, distributing, or public display of pictures, paintings, photographs, or other pictorial representations of the work, if the building in which the work is embodied is located in or ordinarily visible from a public place.
(emphasis mine)
Do you mean "pirate" a commercial multi-track editing program?
That's exactly what I meant, since the article in question is about S. Korean "pirates" destroying the old music business model. Arr.
I realize that they are lining their pockets and fleecing the artists, but at a certain point (and 95% shutting down seems like that kind of point) it stops making sense to continue business.
You don't need a record company to make an album. Get a bunch of guys together and record it at home -- heck, download the multi-track software for free on your favorite p2p app and mix the music yourself. Then spread the music through the web. If people like it, they might buy an "album" that has some value-added benefit, or do what they did in the OLD days:
Go see a live show.
Oh, but that involves actually being able to perform, and possibly even play your own instruments. Frankly, the only people I see that are really going to be hurt by this are all the corporate pop "divas" and hit-of-the-hour type crapola that pollutes the air waves thanks to the juggernaut of corporate media shoving it down our throats. Go and see a live band, give them your money directly.
If a jam band from Vermont could make a mint doing it, I'm not too worried about the death of music any time soon.
As an author, I wonder how much of your valued craft was honed by reading the work of others for education and inspiration. How many books did you buy in elementary school, or high school? Yet that's where you learned your precious language skills you now market.
Knowledge, even the limited knowledge of an author, does not exist in a vacuum. You read, you learn, you practice, then you create. You could not have done this without the beneficence of others who aren't making a dime off the education they provided you.
To unleash the vast amounts of knowledge stored up in the LOC to the world would be one of the single best things this country could do for mankind. One book, one reader my hairy ass. Why not open the floodgates so everyone can benefit?
I understand the motivation of monetary incentives, but I also know a lot of great authors who died penniless. And they were at least brave enough to sign their names to their ideas.
We have seen multiple times that tightly controlled markets tend to do worse than markets that are more free.
And I can point to a number of other times when a tightly-held monopoly has run amok and trampled the rights of the consumer underfoot.
You can go back a hundred years, or a hundred days for more evidence of this.
Can any photography buffs out there see themselves using something like this? A step up from the storage bricks I could imagine.
Not really. There are a lot of reasons, perhaps most importantly, there's not likely to be a RAW converter built into it, which means that I can only see the JPG's I shoot. If I want to look a the images, I have to either dump it to a laptop or use my camera. So that fancy screen doesn't do me a whole heck of a lot of good. Why not just save a step (and some cash?)
As for the cost savings over CF cards -- well, I can get two or three two-gig cards for that much money. How many shots would I take for an assignment? Maybe 2000-3000 max. So I don't really need the off-storage capacity unless it's all RAW files (which take up more space), but then we're back to problem #1.
The last big issue is transfer speed. Most photo-banks like this have terrible write speeds -- 10 minutes for a 512 meg card is not unusual. There are dedicated image "tank" solutions designed for photographers that have 10 MB/s transfer speeds already -- and cost half the price.
Just about the only reason a photographer would use one is to listen to MP3's while shooting, but again, there are better solutions already out there for this.
This would be a nice little unit for travel -- though most long airplane rides already offer your own little screen with a choice of movies. Basically your target audience is someone who rides the bus a lot -- unfortunately, not the sort of demographic that has $800 of discretionary income to spend on a gadget.
I'm asking 'cause I don't know.
If you were to "meet" the trash you threw out in orbit, it might be moving at significant velocity, but then, so are you, right? I mean, if something moving at 17,000 miles per hour hits something moving in the same direction at 17,002 miles per hour, it's not the end of the world, is it?
It's not like you're you've got to dig a Tostitos bag from out of your cranium.
if they go on spacewalk in order to heave it behind (relative to orbital path) the station, the station will pick up orbital speed and the trash will loose orbital speed
...but in throwing the trash, the astronauts overexert themselves, requiring more water and food, and breathing much harder. So they'll use less fuel of the "rocket" variety, but require more fuel of the "human" variety.
Remember, energy cannot be created or destroyed, just transferred. Or, "You can't get sumthin' for nuthin'"
A fascinating amendment would be that no person with a felony conviction would be allowed to hold public office.
Isn't it funny that convicted felons can't vote in some states, but they can still run for political office! Is this country fucked or what?
many people, if pressed to do so, would agree that the world is at least a little bit safer without Saddam Hussein in charge in Iraq, regardless of whether he had any WMD
I don't know. I think the world would be a safer place if we put him back in charge. He was doing a fine job at keeping all the different extremist religious groups in check. Now it's hell-in-a-handbasket over there. Know how many Americans Saddam killed in the past decade? None. Now he's gone and we're past 1,000 casualties.
Of course, I suppose you could argue that the "world" might not be safer, but at least the Iraqi people are. Not these Iraqis, for course.
Anyway white rice is fucking awful for you
Again, it is a staple in Asian diets. Not brown rice, either. And I don't think it's simply a matter of smaller portions or genetics -- when I lived in Asia I didn't notice the portions being significantly smaller than what I eat now. Why wouldn't we see a large amount of diabetes sufferers in the Asian population if white rice was so bad for the human body?
I fixed my propane BBQ
Mmmmm... ribs. You do know that meats wreak havoc on your digestive system, and in large quantities contribute to heart disease (though eating lean meats, as you mention, can avoid this), diabetes and gout.
So you know, I'm a carnivore and always will be. But let's not kid ourselves: if you just ate soy, vegetables and fruits for the rest of your life, you'd probably be much healthier overall (but a lot more miserable).
do Americans really put cream in their coffee
Some of us do, if we can find it. Usually most places carry a half-cream, half-milk concoction called Half-and-Half.
Personally, I use Light Cream (called "Table Cream" in the Great Plains). This is a less-heavy version of Heavy Cream (also called "Whipping Cream").
And what's with the italics? Are you trying to insinuate that cream in coffee is gross or something? How about this:
Do Europeans really put milk in their tea?
I hate all the folks around me say "Gah" when they want to express frustration. Never heard it in NY.
Sorry, what I meant to say was, "Goddamn fuckin' mutha-fuckah's!"
And there goes my karma.
Genetics: I haven't seen very many fat Asian-Americans either.
I don't think genetics is an issue here. Obesity levels in Asia are growing in proportion to the level of western (specifically, American) influence. So while there isn't an epidemic of obesity in China, there is a growing problem in Japan.
Obesity is on the rise in Japan as they have been adopting more "American" eating habits. In conjunction with weight, there has been a dramatic increase in diabetes and cardiovascular disease. Extremely dramatic. This isn't because the genetic structure of Japanese people has changed in the last 20 years.
You're always eating plenty of meats and vegetables to go along with it.
That's true. Unfortunately, even reasonably sane portions of rice that an average meal might contain would be a big no-no in the Atkins plan.
As for the lack of exercise, maybe we should adjust our eating habits to our lifestyle, instead of adjusting our lifestyle to our eating habits.
Well, we really should be attacking it from both ends, don't you think? Our lifestyle has changed dramatically over the past hundred years -- we walk less, sit for far longer periods of time -- but our bodies haven't changed substantially. While you're right in saying that there's no need for 3500 calorie diets when all you do is drive and sit all day, there is still a fundemental requirement of movement if you expect your body to be reasonably fit.
If I did nothing all day, but ate properly, my muscles would still atrophie. The human body needs a modicum of exertion just to maintain homeostasis. When the most exercise you get in your day is when you're brushing your teeth, you're going to have problems.
aspartaam is a neurotoxin
Damn! I was wondering why I always get headaches when I mistakingly drink Diet Coke.
Bless Iowa City, the best city of its size in the Midwest.
That's amazing -- when I drove from Boston to Nebraska, I stopped in Iowa City and there actually was one decent coffee place in town that everyone recommended. It was the only good coffee on the entire trip.
Please don't get me wrong by the title of my post. You had a lot of good things to say, particularly about the unnecessary addition of sugar in foods where sugar has no place being in the first place.
But sugar and "carbs" are not the problem. The lack of exercise it the problem. Our entire society is structured in such a way as to make regular, daily exercise impossible. Perfect example: the suburbs. Ever notice why people in cities are generally thinner than people out in the 'burbs? Because they WALK MORE. Argh.
No matter how you feel about no- or low-carb diets like atkins (which is just a new name on an old diet, which can be referred to as a low-carb modified fast) the fact is that we eat too many carbohydrates.
Ok, then. Can you please explain something to me. It's just something that's been bothering me about all these Atkins ditto-heads.
Ok, here goes. You ready?
Asian People.
Ever been to Asia? Because there aren't a lot of fat people there. It's actually amazing! A place where the PRIMARY FOOD SOURCE is RICE, (a carbohydrate!) and yet there is no epidemic of obesity like there is in the States.
Sorry to hear about your plight, but it could be worse...
I live in "God's Country" (place your finger in the middle of the U.S. -- that's about where I am) and I have the opposite problem -- nobody has cream here.
Now, I started drinking coffee in the Italian area of Boston. I can't stand not having cream in my coffee. And out here, I'm literally surrounded by cows, but everyone insists on putting this "Creamer" stuff in their coffee. Creamer can be left open, in a warm room, for months and not go bad. It's simply not from this earth.
These fat slobs (some of the fattest in the nation!) would super-size their ASPIRIN if they had the chance, but "oh no, cream is too filling!" Gah!
And naturally nobody has ever heard of SUGAR. No, it's all artificial, carcinogenic "sweeteners". Most of the people just drink Foldgers instant-coffee, anyway. Mixed to half-strength.
If you're ever in the Mid-West, just remember that "coffee" means "slightly brown-tinted water with artifical sweeteners and fake milk."
God, I wish I had mod points for you.
And on a slightly-related, but not really note: we're in the 21st century, folks. Text editors should not be necessary for software configuration.
Really? Works fine on my Color Laserjet 1500L.