There's been a few other long-term studies that were done that were claimed "inconclusive" prior to this one. Most of them showed there was a serious problem with HFCS, but this one goes further to show that it's worse than many thought of the stuff.
If you're counting calories- it's identical. That's what the producers of HFCS would have you believe is all that matters.
The problem is that it isn't identical. Not even close.
The fructose is in an immediately available fashion to your body, which means it's absorbed on the spot, unlike sucrose which has to be cracked apart first. From there it lies in your blood stream until your liver can utilize it. Your liver absorbs and converts some of this fructose into it's roughly one day's store of glycogen. Once it has a day's worth of reserve, it starts converting the rest as it gets to it into triglycerides and fatty tissue within the liver (Look up "fatty liver disease" via Google...). While it's waiting to be converted the pancreas sees the sugar levels rise and tries to pull the sugar OUT of the blood stream by increasing insulin levels. Unfortunately, only glucose responds directly to the insulin part of your hormone system- fructose is largely processed by your liver and only your liver. This has the predictable effect of yanking the glucose out of your blood stream. At some threshold, the body detects problems caused by the sugars being ripped out of your system by that and starts producing glucagon which orders the liver to start converting the glycogen in it's store back into glucose. Over time, this swinging, the triglycerides, and the other stuff going on combine to provide leptin resistance and insulin resistance- which are the hallmark signs of Type 2 Diabetes, something we're supposedly having an "epidemic" of in the "Western" world.
And this doesn't even get into the traces of mercury and other chemicals you're exposed to when you eat HFCS as part of your diet.
In the end, while you do need Fructose, you don't need the quantities that the Western populace seem to consume, nor do you need or want it in the form that we're exposed to it.
Okay... That solves the iD/ZeniMax side to that story, but doesn't get them out of the need to get signoff from each and every contributor that provided fixes, enhancements, etc. to the engine.
If they wanted to do this in the first place, they shouldn't have used the GPLed Quake1 core and licensed IdTech2 out of the gate.
We've not heard either way- and until iD or their parent chimes in on the matter or we see signed paperwork (and there's actioned documents typically involved with this sort of thing...) showing that Illfonic has a license grant for the Quake derived portions of the DarkPlaces engine, there's issues.
Not to mention that LordHavoc has to have the same sort of thing to be able to do a PS3 version to begin with, along with signoff and similar documentation for each and every substantive contributor to the engine that didn't assign to him or iD.
Even if it was that, I'd love to see his signed off on license documents from iD that'd have allowed him to make Nexuiz a commercial game like is claimed on that post. If he didn't have them, he's NOT licensed to make a closed commercial game there with the codebase he's using.
Indeed. However, one wonders just what the price is for such licensing. A few years back it was still in the six figures for Q3:A. I'd say that we're probably talking 30-75k for what Illfonic would need to get signoff on from ZeniMax on the DarkPlaces pieces they've rights control over.
That's still quite a bit of scratch there- and it doesn't get into any of the rights for the contributors to the game engine. Each one would have to release/license rights accordingly to allow no GPL snags to exist for Illfonic.
If that were wholly the case, then why is *BSD not *THE* OS out there used in everything from routers to mobile phones to desktops to servers?
When you simplify it to the terms you're using, things completely break down.
Some things the GPL makes sense for.
Some things BSD makes more sense.
Not everything is or HAS to be with one license.
Everyone should take some serious note here: DarkPlaces is a derivation of the original Quake GPL release with many enhancements. If it has any substantive pieces of Quake code in it, ZeniMax has a MAJOR say in things and nobody's asked if they've blessed their part of this or not.
It's a licensing restriction. And it's perfectly allowable and enforceable.
If you choose to use the code, you may use DRM in your binaries, so long as you abide by the other terms of the license- which includes not using the DMCA against efforts to reverse engineer and remove your DRM. If you choose to use the DMCA, you're NOT licensed to make derivative works or publish complete copies of the licensed work.
It's yet another item you agree to for the typical royalty "payment" required in these transactions. In exchange for these considerations, you may use the protected works in the following enumerated ways.
Up to a point, they're part of what drives the innovation and tech to get the magic toys we DO have right now. And it's part of that which you talk to that is driving the push in the ARM space right now...
Considering that you CAN buy it all in the form of the AlwaysInnovating tablet, Beagleboard, Gumstix Overo, and the Motorola Droid...I think you should revisit your thinking there. (As an aside, the Droid just has a crippled battery situation because it's difficult to wedge in much bigger a battery than a 3.8 watt-hour one because of size restrictions...or you could very easily do it- and you can with an outrigger battery that gives you that magic 13.5 watt-hour charge store...).
I've seen the Pandora do it. I've got a Beagleboard that if I had a flat-panel display tied to it's HDMI/DVI connector, it'd do it with a good display- and if you're a DIY type it or the Overo Fire or Water COM devices will do this in style (as in you could, barring the display, put the whole thing into a package the size of the Moto Droid...). The AlwaysInnovating Touch tablet CAN do it and you CAN buy it- right now. I just talked to what I've actually seen done (and I've had one of the engineering boards in hand at one point in time...) rather than a "nebulous" maybe I think can be done based off of the other experiences.
In the end...it's already there if you just go looking for it. Sadly, I suspect there's lots of people wanting it to be just simply handed to them and it's not there yet and won't be for probably another 6-12 months yet to come.
In the case of the DoD, I'd be looking closer to the NSA way of doing things than not. Too much risk of a mission critical piece of data leaking or of some critical infrastructure piece in C-cubed being crippled by other things. Seriously.
If you have issues with your users in the context of this- perhaps it's time to re-evaluate your software, hardware, etc. Ease of use will cause problems with security each and every time. No, it doesn't need to be complicated- but ease of use will invariably inject exploit paths where you didn't want them. So, you should only make it as easy as it makes sense to do so in the context of security. For the DoD, I would have thought the problems they were having with USB thumbs would be a red-flag item for the system choices they're making, but apparently not.
If that were the case, wouldn't the number of IIS servers remotely compromised would be less than the Apache ones? Since it's not, you should re-think your arguments there.
Security is not a function of popularity or usage. Security is only partially part of the OS or application design. Ease of use actually gets in the way of security each and every time.
No, you don't "have" to do anything that you didn't sign on for.
Windows has a very definite issue with regards to security, even 7- anyone telling you otherwise is selling something. You should consider re-thinking your ideas about whether you "have" to do it or not- if only on the security angle and the REAL total cost of ownership (which is more than just the purchase and support contract prices by a longshot...). Ask Ernie Ball's IT people about whether or not you "have" to have Windows- you'll be surprised at what they or Ball himself will tell you there.
You don't "have" to support MacOS or Linux- but if you want to do your job right, you'll do it anyway. Moreover, you'll actually lower your support efforts in doing it.
I've seen it go 10 hours running an emulator (which is actually more stressful than the DSP's efforts to do HD video would be...) and this was with a single 13.5 watt-hour battery attached to the device.
In the end, any Cortex-A8 or Sheeva based SoC with a DSP chip will do this out of box because of the power/performance profile they have.
Indeed... If you can find causation, you'll find correlation.
There statistics will help confirm you're on the right path...after a fashion.
But so many people misuse the tool in question to go the other way around- and try to prove causation with correlations. You might be able to do that, through dumb luck. As often as not, you'll get all sorts of wild assumptions come up as theory due to that attempt as as likely as not you've missed something. That's why statistical analysis and meta-analysis used solely to validate a premise should be viewed as the hokum it typically ends up panning out to be (Just look at the past- it's replete with people thinking the most ludicrous things based off of "the statistics"...).
Depends on your application. Pick the lowest one that supports what you need out of the API edges for the application. For the applications I'm writing right at the moment, that would be 1.5 or later since they've got OpenGL ES 1.1 support (at minimum) available if the vendor making the device licensed the driver stack from the respective GPU vendors sitting in the SoC's in use (So far, I've not seen an Android that had a decent 1.1 GPU not have the drivers licensed for them...).
As long as you're not hitting an API breakage (It's my understanding that there's none with 1.5 going forward...) the app should just simply work.
That's not a pragmatist in the office. I'm still not quite sure WHAT the man is or what he actually stands for- but it's nothing to do with pragmatism.
Heh... They're there to enforce laws which might have the beneficial side effect of protecting you in a pinch if you're lucky. As it has always been (and part of the reason for the Second Amendment...) you are strictly on your own if you're otherwise law-abiding and you're attacked. I'm still puzzling out how people came to the conclusion they're obligated to do anything to protect you in the first place.
Slashdot Mirror
Heh...
There's been a few other long-term studies that were done that were claimed "inconclusive" prior to this one. Most of them showed there was a serious problem with HFCS, but this one goes further to show that it's worse than many thought of the stuff.
If you're counting calories- it's identical. That's what the producers of HFCS would have you believe is all that matters.
The problem is that it isn't identical. Not even close.
The fructose is in an immediately available fashion to your body, which means it's absorbed on the spot, unlike sucrose which has to be cracked apart first. From there it lies in your blood stream until your liver can utilize it. Your liver absorbs and converts some of this fructose into it's roughly one day's store of glycogen. Once it has a day's worth of reserve, it starts converting the rest as it gets to it into triglycerides and fatty tissue within the liver (Look up "fatty liver disease" via Google...). While it's waiting to be converted the pancreas sees the sugar levels rise and tries to pull the sugar OUT of the blood stream by increasing insulin levels. Unfortunately, only glucose responds directly to the insulin part of your hormone system- fructose is largely processed by your liver and only your liver. This has the predictable effect of yanking the glucose out of your blood stream. At some threshold, the body detects problems caused by the sugars being ripped out of your system by that and starts producing glucagon which orders the liver to start converting the glycogen in it's store back into glucose. Over time, this swinging, the triglycerides, and the other stuff going on combine to provide leptin resistance and insulin resistance- which are the hallmark signs of Type 2 Diabetes, something we're supposedly having an "epidemic" of in the "Western" world.
And this doesn't even get into the traces of mercury and other chemicals you're exposed to when you eat HFCS as part of your diet.
In the end, while you do need Fructose, you don't need the quantities that the Western populace seem to consume, nor do you need or want it in the form that we're exposed to it.
Okay... That solves the iD/ZeniMax side to that story, but doesn't get them out of the need to get signoff from each and every contributor that provided fixes, enhancements, etc. to the engine.
If they wanted to do this in the first place, they shouldn't have used the GPLed Quake1 core and licensed IdTech2 out of the gate.
But...did ZeniMax give HIM permission?
We've not heard either way- and until iD or their parent chimes in on the matter or we see signed paperwork (and there's actioned documents typically involved with this sort of thing...) showing that Illfonic has a license grant for the Quake derived portions of the DarkPlaces engine, there's issues.
Not to mention that LordHavoc has to have the same sort of thing to be able to do a PS3 version to begin with, along with signoff and similar documentation for each and every substantive contributor to the engine that didn't assign to him or iD.
Remains to be seen. All depends on whether Illfonic has a paid-up license on the affected code that belongs to ZeniMax.
Even if it was that, I'd love to see his signed off on license documents from iD that'd have allowed him to make Nexuiz a commercial game like is claimed on that post. If he didn't have them, he's NOT licensed to make a closed commercial game there with the codebase he's using.
Indeed. However, one wonders just what the price is for such licensing. A few years back it was still in the six figures for Q3:A. I'd say that we're probably talking 30-75k for what Illfonic would need to get signoff on from ZeniMax on the DarkPlaces pieces they've rights control over.
That's still quite a bit of scratch there- and it doesn't get into any of the rights for the contributors to the game engine. Each one would have to release/license rights accordingly to allow no GPL snags to exist for Illfonic.
If that were wholly the case, then why is *BSD not *THE* OS out there used in everything from routers to mobile phones to desktops to servers?
When you simplify it to the terms you're using, things completely break down.
Some things the GPL makes sense for.
Some things BSD makes more sense.
Not everything is or HAS to be with one license.
Everyone should take some serious note here: DarkPlaces is a derivation of the original Quake GPL release with many enhancements. If it has any substantive pieces of Quake code in it, ZeniMax has a MAJOR say in things and nobody's asked if they've blessed their part of this or not.
It's a licensing restriction. And it's perfectly allowable and enforceable.
If you choose to use the code, you may use DRM in your binaries, so long as you abide by the other terms of the license- which includes not using the DMCA against efforts to reverse engineer and remove your DRM. If you choose to use the DMCA, you're NOT licensed to make derivative works or publish complete copies of the licensed work.
It's yet another item you agree to for the typical royalty "payment" required in these transactions. In exchange for these considerations, you may use the protected works in the following enumerated ways.
Heh...
Up to a point, they're part of what drives the innovation and tech to get the magic toys we DO have right now. And it's part of that which you talk to that is driving the push in the ARM space right now...
Considering that you CAN buy it all in the form of the AlwaysInnovating tablet, Beagleboard, Gumstix Overo, and the Motorola Droid...I think you should revisit your thinking there. (As an aside, the Droid just has a crippled battery situation because it's difficult to wedge in much bigger a battery than a 3.8 watt-hour one because of size restrictions...or you could very easily do it- and you can with an outrigger battery that gives you that magic 13.5 watt-hour charge store...).
I've seen the Pandora do it. I've got a Beagleboard that if I had a flat-panel display tied to it's HDMI/DVI connector, it'd do it with a good display- and if you're a DIY type it or the Overo Fire or Water COM devices will do this in style (as in you could, barring the display, put the whole thing into a package the size of the Moto Droid...). The AlwaysInnovating Touch tablet CAN do it and you CAN buy it- right now. I just talked to what I've actually seen done (and I've had one of the engineering boards in hand at one point in time...) rather than a "nebulous" maybe I think can be done based off of the other experiences.
In the end...it's already there if you just go looking for it. Sadly, I suspect there's lots of people wanting it to be just simply handed to them and it's not there yet and won't be for probably another 6-12 months yet to come.
Yes and no.
In the case of the DoD, I'd be looking closer to the NSA way of doing things than not. Too much risk of a mission critical piece of data leaking or of some critical infrastructure piece in C-cubed being crippled by other things. Seriously.
If you have issues with your users in the context of this- perhaps it's time to re-evaluate your software, hardware, etc. Ease of use will cause problems with security each and every time. No, it doesn't need to be complicated- but ease of use will invariably inject exploit paths where you didn't want them. So, you should only make it as easy as it makes sense to do so in the context of security. For the DoD, I would have thought the problems they were having with USB thumbs would be a red-flag item for the system choices they're making, but apparently not.
Ahh, yes... The popularity argument.
If that were the case, wouldn't the number of IIS servers remotely compromised would be less than the Apache ones? Since it's not, you should re-think your arguments there.
Security is not a function of popularity or usage.
Security is only partially part of the OS or application design.
Ease of use actually gets in the way of security each and every time.
You know...they don't need this sort of crap on their Linux and Solaris boxes...
No, you don't "have" to do anything that you didn't sign on for.
Windows has a very definite issue with regards to security, even 7- anyone telling you otherwise is selling something. You should consider re-thinking your ideas about whether you "have" to do it or not- if only on the security angle and the REAL total cost of ownership (which is more than just the purchase and support contract prices by a longshot...). Ask Ernie Ball's IT people about whether or not you "have" to have Windows- you'll be surprised at what they or Ball himself will tell you there.
You don't "have" to support MacOS or Linux- but if you want to do your job right, you'll do it anyway. Moreover, you'll actually lower your support efforts in doing it.
No fanboyism needed. OMAP3, iMx515, Snapdragon, and Armada are all capable of it right now.
It's already here.
I've seen it go 10 hours running an emulator (which is actually more stressful than the DSP's efforts to do HD video would be...) and this was with a single 13.5 watt-hour battery attached to the device.
In the end, any Cortex-A8 or Sheeva based SoC with a DSP chip will do this out of box because of the power/performance profile they have.
It sits there for a moment and then pops up an "Anti-Virus Software has detected an infection" Javascript window and then goes to town.
Indeed... If you can find causation, you'll find correlation.
There statistics will help confirm you're on the right path...after a fashion.
But so many people misuse the tool in question to go the other way around- and try to prove causation with correlations. You might be able to do that, through dumb luck. As often as not, you'll get all sorts of wild assumptions come up as theory due to that attempt as as likely as not you've missed something. That's why statistical analysis and meta-analysis used solely to validate a premise should be viewed as the hokum it typically ends up panning out to be (Just look at the past- it's replete with people thinking the most ludicrous things based off of "the statistics"...).
If you can find an unlocked BackFlip, you'd be in the right ballpark.
Depends on your application. Pick the lowest one that supports what you need out of the API edges for the application. For the applications I'm writing right at the moment, that would be 1.5 or later since they've got OpenGL ES 1.1 support (at minimum) available if the vendor making the device licensed the driver stack from the respective GPU vendors sitting in the SoC's in use (So far, I've not seen an Android that had a decent 1.1 GPU not have the drivers licensed for them...).
As long as you're not hitting an API breakage (It's my understanding that there's none with 1.5 going forward...) the app should just simply work.
That's not a pragmatist in the office. I'm still not quite sure WHAT the man is or what he actually stands for- but it's nothing to do with pragmatism.
I'm beginning to think some might be twigging onto the concept, especially with this sort of crap coming down from Washington like this.
Because being sensible about this doesn't meet up with his agenda...
Heh... They're there to enforce laws which might have the beneficial side effect of protecting you in a pinch if you're lucky. As it has always been (and part of the reason for the Second Amendment...) you are strictly on your own if you're otherwise law-abiding and you're attacked. I'm still puzzling out how people came to the conclusion they're obligated to do anything to protect you in the first place.
Uh...try again.