The doctors told him that pretty much anyone who jogged that much has to get new knees.
Running is a complex biomechanical activity. Most people I see running are not running with biomechanically-correct form. This probably stems from lack of knowledge of how to run correctly, lack of core strength to run correctly, shoes that do not fit their physiology and personal running form, etc., etc.
Since most people run with poor form, it's not a surprise that most people that jog require knee replacements.
Running, when done correctly, produces minimal stress on knee joints, even at 10+ mph.
Modern padded running shoes promote bad form, causing knee and other injuries, and prevent your feet from strengthening, causing planar fascitis and a few other maladies. Your foot is actually well constructed to run, but it can't do it's job wrapped in a ton of leather and foam.
I've had some success with minimalist running shoes (abrasion protection only, no padding, sole is about 1/8" thick)- it's important to enable your feet to strengthen. After a few weeks of walking around in thin shoes, I started running again and it felt like I had new feet- it was awesome.
I've been wearing Newtons for the past few years. I had tried running regularly in the past, but always quit after awhile because of knee/leg pain. The first few times it was from just trying to go too far too fast. One year I took it up slowly and was able to do a 5k, but my knees/legs were still sore. After that first 5k, I picked up a pair of Newtons to give them a shot. The first month of running in them was very awkward and caused soreness in whole different groups of muscles, but even on the first run with them I didn't feel it in my knees at all. Been running mostly pain free since then.
10 years ago in college I was talking with a teacher with a PHD related to wellness and we got on this exact topic. They told me too much exercise is well known to increase arterial plaque and was a major health issue with long distance runners. Great hearts, bad plaque.
Everyone I know equates a good diet with being healthy.
A more important aspect is the activity level and physical exercise.
When I was a state champion level gymnast my health was amazing. I had six pack abs at the age of eleven because I worked out and trained 20 hours a week.
During that time I ate mcdonalds every day. I ate fries at school. Milkshakes, candy bars. Any source of calories I could get.
And my health was phenomenal.
Everyone (but women especially for some reason) seems to think that a 'healthy' diet is the answer when what they really need is to work more. I'm not saying healthy eating is bad. But if you don't use your body it will never truly be your tool and always be something your working against rather than working for you.
Use your body or it will atrophy in every way.
Do you still have that six pack? Are you still eating mcdonalds, fries, milkshakes, and candy bars all the time?
"I used to think vitamins had been thoroughly studied for their health trade-offs. They haven't. The reason you take one multivitamin pill a day is marketing, not science."
What the hell has he been reading? Clearly not enough.
In the 1930s vitamins and biochemistry suddenly appeared. By 1948 it had been shown one cures polio with 100% efficacy and zero side effects. But, the commercial pressure from the pharma companies who stood to make billions suppressed it. There are thousands of clinical reports that show clearly some vitamins in therapeutic doses have a rather dramatic effect.
In Japan for example they've treated MRSA with IV C with striking success and they keep asking why no American journal will publish it.
Scott doesn't have enough of a biochem background and hasn't read enough to know what's what. The levels in a multivitamin are too low to be useful, so I guess we agree they're worthless.
In the last 5 years, fish oil, niacin and bad gut flora have been recognized by the medical industry; prior to that they were ridiculed as "alternative" medicine for 100, 50 and 35 years respectively. It takes generations for new advances to filter out to the medical establishment and if Adams had done the proper reading he's see where science hasn't failed us, marketing has. Foster's work on HIV or Shaefer and Potter's work on cancer would open anyones eyes who knew enough to understand what they've written.
First and foremost, what do you think stoped Ebola, Scott? It wasn't a vaccine.
was not found.
"Klenner's paper (Klenner FR. The treatment of poliomyelitis and other virus diseases with vitamin C. J. South. Med. and Surg., 111:210-214, 1949.) on curing 60 cases of polio in the epidemic of 1948 should have changed the way infectious diseases were treated but it did not." - Robert Cathcart
That's amazing! Why are they still messing around with antibiotics to combat MRSA then if they already know that IV C works? http://www.japantimes.co.jp/ne...
If you want to learn about nutrition and exercise get away from the marketing and the news and start looking at what athletes and bodybuilders are doing. They've been doing it for a long time and if you look closely a lot of what they do is backed up by science. Eating grilled chicken/steak/fish with brown rice and steamed vegetables and doing weight lifting/high intensity interval training doesn't grab headlines though and takes effort.
That's *hard*...lifting and high intensity interval training takes like an hour out of my day! Then cooking stuff? That's at least another hour for prep, cooking, eating, and cleaning! After eating that way for a few months, the idea of going to a seafood joint and ordering the Admiral's platter of everything in the sea fried up with a side of fries and hush puppies doesn't even sound the least bit appetizing. At that point, it's just kind of habit and easy.
Utter bullshit. The easiest way to control weight is to exactly follow the scientific advice. I lost a lot of weight (about 25 kg over 6 months) by a simple system:...
Within the chosen margin of error of measurement, it works, bitches.
During this time, did your food source significantly change? If you went from ordering two big macs from McDonalds every day to only one big mac, then your conclusions are valid. If you went from eating two big macs to something else that is the caloric equivalent of one big mac, but a substantially different food, then there are more variables at play. That is why nutrition, weight loss, etc is such a tricky thing to get correct. There are so many variables that can have a huge impact. Energy in - Energy out simplifies it a bit too much, but the general idea is sound. Why that approach works for people usually has more to do with them starting to pay attention to their food intake and activity levels, and making more sound choices for both as a result.
This is clearly aimed at companies abusing the "Double Irish" system. Seems like the rate should be set much higher, so that companies are punished and lose more than they would if they did the right thing and repatriated profits and paid the normal tax rates on them.
Unfortunately, you would most likely see a lot of companies moving their official headquarters to someplace else. The most recent example I can think of is the Walgreens/Boots purchase/merger. It seems that one of the reasons behind it was for the combined entity to have is GHQ in Europe instead of the US to get around US tax code. The backlash towards Walgreens was rather severe though, so they said they were no longer considering that option.
combine the two and now they know that the person who was at shop A at time X, shop B at time Y, and shop C at time Z also appears to live at address Q and work at address R, and there you go: anyone who can get the "anonymized" data knows where you live, and that you just bought not only new living room electronics but also airline tickets.
and then......? They send a salesman to your house from shops A, B, and C trying to sell you something? How often do you buy a lot of living room electronics, then go on vacation?
Firstly, the mosquito in question, Aedes aegypti is not native to the Americas. If we destroy them utterly, bats and whatever will go back to eating other mosquitoes.
Secondly, the release of genetically altered mosquitoes has been done before in the Cayman Islands, which reduced the mosquito population by 80%.
Thirdly, this type of modification (where the insects mate but the offspring don't develop) has been done in America before with the screw worm, which infected mostly livestock (and some humans). The screw worm has no redeeming qualities whatsoever, good riddance.
And finally, the headline "FDA Wants To Release Millions of Genetically Modified Mosquitoes In Florida" is one-sided and inflammatory. It does not mention "FDA wants to control several types of tropical fevers" or "FDA wants to eliminate a non-native pest that transmits disease".
Let's get everyone all worked up about the uncertainties of genetic engineering by completely ignoring the contextual reasons for doing so.
Because, you know, genetic engineering is bad in any form, even if it saves lives and brings the ecology closer to its original state.
Too bad you can't be modded +6. Replace those articles with your post and they would be far more effective at informing.
So, rabbits that got released in Australia are the top predator? The Pampas grass in California is the top predator? I can make a long list of invasive species that are not the top predator and still influenced their ecosystem a lot. Grass, as far as I know, is pretty much the bottom of the food chain.
Make sure you list the Aedes aegypti mosquito is on your invasive species list for the Florida Keys. Particularly relevant since those are the ones they are trying to get rid of. I don't think anybody release rabbits in Australia to control the invasive rabbit population.
That's because most physics and chemistry experiments don't breed and multiply.
This has the potential to affect people directly. They are not talking about an experiment somewhere in a lab. They are talking about something that happens literally in their own backyard. People are responsible for their own well-being, and they should understand the risks that affect their lives. They are right to do a risk assessment. They see a potentially large effect, and do not yet understand the chance of it going wrong, so they logically assume the worst and therefore scream and shout. It's up to those arrogant scientists to better explain the experiment that is about to take place in people's backyards.
Also, biology experiments have gone wrong before. Changing the balance in an ecosystem can have huge consequences.
They've done the same thing in the Cayman Islands. You can look there and see what the impact was.
The problem is that they are genetically modified, and the hippies refer to them as "GMO Mosquitos," and thus they are unnatural abominations. They think that the mosquitos will bite people and infect them with their GMO DNA, as if they were vampires that turn humans into giant GMO mosquitos. When informed that they are releasing males, and males don't bite, they either deny that males don't bite, or insist that the few females will still make it through will bite and infect people with their GMO DNA that will cause cancer, gluten intolerance (seriously, I heard that one today), kidney disease, heart disease, hyperthyroidism, IBS, ALS, MS, Parkinson's, birth defects, and a few others that I don't remember. And no, I am not making that shit up and I am not exaggerating, anti-GMOers' grasp on reality is approximately equal to Scientologists.
You heard somebody say that the bite from a GMO mosquito will cause gluten intolerance? boggle Wait until they hear that the modified DNA for the mosquitoes is taken from herpes and E. Coli.
Heroin was the best medicine I ever had. It calmed me down, made me able to function without the constant "white noise" that makes me so anxious around people. The biggest problem with heroin was its illegality.
How much music has been produced on heroin? Charlie Parker, John Coltrane, Miles Davis, Keith Richards, Kurt Cobain, Chet Baker, Art Pepper, etc.
Charlie Parker had cirrhosis and died at 34, "The coroner who performed his autopsy mistakenly estimated Parker's 34-year-old body to be between 50 and 60 years of age." John Coltrane died at 40 Miles Davis lived to be 65, so it doesn't seem like any drugs destroyed his life Keith Richards is a skin-suit on a robotic exoskeleton Kurt Cobain died at 27 Chet Baker died of accidental causes while high on cocaine and heroin at 58 Art Pepper died of a stroke...no idea if drugs contributed at all, but he was also only 56
I don't know if letting kids this age walk home is the right thing, but I respect the right of the parents to make that decision. The world over child services staff are self-righteous twerps, who give all the signs of knowing very little about the range of problems parents face, and know even less about helping, rather than punishing parents trying to do the right thing.
My parents were generally overprotective, and I was allowed to walk home from school every day when I was 7. There were many kids younger than that whose parents would let them walk home, and it was a lot farther than a mile. The next school year, I could ride my bike to and from school.
In Japan they have something called "first errand". Young school children, say 5 or 6, are given a simple task to do such as go to the local shop and buy a specific item, then bring it home. The school organizes this and gets the parents to come in and help by watching the children from a distance. Adults are not allowed to help the children unless they get into serious difficulty.
Haha, I've never heard of this, but that sounds very Japanese. Take something fairly ordinary and mundane, then turn it into a festival/ritual/rite of passage.
I hear you, but my genetics are corrupt and most people would never believe that I have lived through what I have. I would not want to relate any of the details. It would be irresponsible for me to father a child. Realizing that I don't have the emotional tools to deal with people on a normal level, much less raise a child, is something that I have come to grips with over a long process. My level of detachment and ability to withstand what would be torturous for most people makes me a good candidate to be a sort of martyr for those in similarly hellish situations but without the ability to express their feelings. You are right, and a wise old guy on the street told me something very similar, but this is "the work I don't want to do."
If you are genuine and not fabricating this homeless persona ("running to a chowline for lentis and rice", who talks like that?), then reducing everything to your "genetics are corrupt" is rather fatalistic and sounds like you're ignoring the real cause of your situation. If you truly would rather live in homelessness, then own it and acknowledge that it is your choice. Don't blame it on your genetics. You can't deal with people on a normal level because you don't have the emotional tools? Fine, neither can a lot of people and they find ways to work around that. You have options and aren't on a set course that you can't deviate from, so don't pretend or lie to yourself that that is the case.
I enjoy going full murder hobo in several games. Postal and Postal II were my absolute favorites.
My favorite was prompting mass social unrest in Syndicate. Gather up a huge crowd of civillians with the persuadatron, then go around killing a lot of cops so your persuaded citizens pick up their weapons, then turn off the persuadatron and watch as the civillians just start randomly shooting each other.
Sorry, if it is on the company's servers, then it is the company's data and not yours. You are not as important to the company as you think you are. If you *actually* are, then they will put you in an exception list. If the policy is causing the company to lose a lot of money from all the "waste of valuable company time", then it will either change the policy or go out of business.
I switched to them couple of years back when Intuit decided that it will not allow web browsers running linux to the online version of TurboTax. Beats me why they did it. It worked perfectly the previous years. Anyway, TaxAct is cheaper and does the job just as well.
They had something screwed up last year at the beginning of tax season, but fixed it towards the end. Their support page looked like it was refreshingly flooded with complaints from Linux users. I tried filing my taxes early and ran into the "browser not supported" error that I couldn't get past, then jumped through some support hoops before deciding I didn't need to file taxes just then anyways. By the time I tried again in April, it was fixed. Which is a moot point now, since I'm not going to pay twice as much for their software this year.
No, but you tend to have more complex tax status... and to the GP's point, you really should be using a CPA. As worthless as my CPA is, I am happy to pay the $350 for him to dump my information into his program.
As for why the change... it is what the market will bear. It is a pain to do Schedule D and the accompanying forms now.
Why not save the the $300 and dump your information into a program yourself?
Yah, I worked at an ISP back then and it when customers would complain that they were getting a slow connection, I'd have them hold the phone up to the modem speaker and try to connect so I could hear it and determine the connection speed and protocol. The BONG! mentioned above pegs it as a 56k modem string:) v.90 i believe.
It is probably a little sad that my first thought when I saw the bongs was "that's 56k...n00b".
The ACA gathers money from those like myself who never get sick.
Look, there are real problems with the ACA, but this is not one of them. This is how insurance works. The problem is that it's actually a system of graft from stem to stern. The health insurance companies must be eliminated if we are to have working health care in America. That's how you know the ACA is a lie. If it were meant to help us, the insurance companies would be gone, because we would no longer need them.
But anything getting rid of the private health insurance companies would never have passed because Big Gubment can't tell those small business owners what to do.
Slashdot Mirror
Running is a complex biomechanical activity. Most people I see running are not running with biomechanically-correct form. This probably stems from lack of knowledge of how to run correctly, lack of core strength to run correctly, shoes that do not fit their physiology and personal running form, etc., etc.
Since most people run with poor form, it's not a surprise that most people that jog require knee replacements.
Running, when done correctly, produces minimal stress on knee joints, even at 10+ mph.
Modern padded running shoes promote bad form, causing knee and other injuries, and prevent your feet from strengthening, causing planar fascitis and a few other maladies. Your foot is actually well constructed to run, but it can't do it's job wrapped in a ton of leather and foam.
I've had some success with minimalist running shoes (abrasion protection only, no padding, sole is about 1/8" thick)- it's important to enable your feet to strengthen. After a few weeks of walking around in thin shoes, I started running again and it felt like I had new feet- it was awesome.
I've been wearing Newtons for the past few years. I had tried running regularly in the past, but always quit after awhile because of knee/leg pain. The first few times it was from just trying to go too far too fast. One year I took it up slowly and was able to do a 5k, but my knees/legs were still sore. After that first 5k, I picked up a pair of Newtons to give them a shot. The first month of running in them was very awkward and caused soreness in whole different groups of muscles, but even on the first run with them I didn't feel it in my knees at all. Been running mostly pain free since then.
10 years ago in college I was talking with a teacher with a PHD related to wellness and we got on this exact topic. They told me too much exercise is well known to increase arterial plaque and was a major health issue with long distance runners. Great hearts, bad plaque.
So, that's interesting, but why does it happen?
Everyone I know equates a good diet with being healthy.
A more important aspect is the activity level and physical exercise.
When I was a state champion level gymnast my health was amazing. I had six pack abs at the age of eleven because I worked out and trained 20 hours a week.
During that time I ate mcdonalds every day. I ate fries at school. Milkshakes, candy bars. Any source of calories I could get.
And my health was phenomenal.
Everyone (but women especially for some reason) seems to think that a 'healthy' diet is the answer when what they really need is to work more. I'm not saying healthy eating is bad. But if you don't use your body it will never truly be your tool and always be something your working against rather than working for you.
Use your body or it will atrophy in every way.
Do you still have that six pack? Are you still eating mcdonalds, fries, milkshakes, and candy bars all the time?
"I used to think vitamins had been thoroughly studied for their health trade-offs. They haven't. The reason you take one multivitamin pill a day is marketing, not science."
What the hell has he been reading? Clearly not enough.
In the 1930s vitamins and biochemistry suddenly appeared. By 1948 it had been shown one cures polio with 100% efficacy and zero side effects. But, the commercial pressure from the pharma companies who stood to make billions suppressed it. There are thousands of clinical reports that show clearly some vitamins in therapeutic doses have a rather dramatic effect.
In Japan for example they've treated MRSA with IV C with striking success and they keep asking why no American journal will publish it.
Scott doesn't have enough of a biochem background and hasn't read enough to know what's what. The levels in a multivitamin are too low to be useful, so I guess we agree they're worthless.
In the last 5 years, fish oil, niacin and bad gut flora have been recognized by the medical industry; prior to that they were ridiculed as "alternative" medicine for 100, 50 and 35 years respectively. It takes generations for new advances to filter out to the medical establishment and if Adams had done the proper reading he's see where science hasn't failed us, marketing has. Foster's work on HIV or Shaefer and Potter's work on cancer would open anyones eyes who knew enough to understand what they've written.
First and foremost, what do you think stoped Ebola, Scott? It wasn't a vaccine.
was not found.
"Klenner's paper (Klenner FR. The treatment of poliomyelitis and other virus diseases with vitamin C. J. South. Med. and Surg., 111:210-214, 1949.) on curing 60 cases of polio in the epidemic of 1948 should have changed the way infectious diseases were treated but it did not." - Robert Cathcart
That's amazing! Why are they still messing around with antibiotics to combat MRSA then if they already know that IV C works?
http://www.japantimes.co.jp/ne...
It's not all a conspiracy...
If you want to learn about nutrition and exercise get away from the marketing and the news and start looking at what athletes and bodybuilders are doing. They've been doing it for a long time and if you look closely a lot of what they do is backed up by science. Eating grilled chicken/steak/fish with brown rice and steamed vegetables and doing weight lifting/high intensity interval training doesn't grab headlines though and takes effort.
That's *hard*...lifting and high intensity interval training takes like an hour out of my day! Then cooking stuff? That's at least another hour for prep, cooking, eating, and cleaning! After eating that way for a few months, the idea of going to a seafood joint and ordering the Admiral's platter of everything in the sea fried up with a side of fries and hush puppies doesn't even sound the least bit appetizing. At that point, it's just kind of habit and easy.
Utter bullshit. The easiest way to control weight is to exactly follow the scientific advice. I lost a lot of weight (about 25 kg over 6 months) by a simple system: ...
Within the chosen margin of error of measurement, it works, bitches.
During this time, did your food source significantly change? If you went from ordering two big macs from McDonalds every day to only one big mac, then your conclusions are valid. If you went from eating two big macs to something else that is the caloric equivalent of one big mac, but a substantially different food, then there are more variables at play. That is why nutrition, weight loss, etc is such a tricky thing to get correct. There are so many variables that can have a huge impact. Energy in - Energy out simplifies it a bit too much, but the general idea is sound. Why that approach works for people usually has more to do with them starting to pay attention to their food intake and activity levels, and making more sound choices for both as a result.
This is clearly aimed at companies abusing the "Double Irish" system. Seems like the rate should be set much higher, so that companies are punished and lose more than they would if they did the right thing and repatriated profits and paid the normal tax rates on them.
Unfortunately, you would most likely see a lot of companies moving their official headquarters to someplace else. The most recent example I can think of is the Walgreens/Boots purchase/merger. It seems that one of the reasons behind it was for the combined entity to have is GHQ in Europe instead of the US to get around US tax code. The backlash towards Walgreens was rather severe though, so they said they were no longer considering that option.
combine the two and now they know that the person who was at shop A at time X, shop B at time Y, and shop C at time Z also appears to live at address Q and work at address R, and there you go: anyone who can get the "anonymized" data knows where you live, and that you just bought not only new living room electronics but also airline tickets.
and then......?
They send a salesman to your house from shops A, B, and C trying to sell you something?
How often do you buy a lot of living room electronics, then go on vacation?
Firstly, the mosquito in question, Aedes aegypti is not native to the Americas. If we destroy them utterly, bats and whatever will go back to eating other mosquitoes.
Secondly, the release of genetically altered mosquitoes has been done before in the Cayman Islands, which reduced the mosquito population by 80%.
Thirdly, this type of modification (where the insects mate but the offspring don't develop) has been done in America before with the screw worm, which infected mostly livestock (and some humans). The screw worm has no redeeming qualities whatsoever, good riddance.
And finally, the headline "FDA Wants To Release Millions of Genetically Modified Mosquitoes In Florida" is one-sided and inflammatory. It does not mention "FDA wants to control several types of tropical fevers" or "FDA wants to eliminate a non-native pest that transmits disease".
Let's get everyone all worked up about the uncertainties of genetic engineering by completely ignoring the contextual reasons for doing so.
Because, you know, genetic engineering is bad in any form, even if it saves lives and brings the ecology closer to its original state.
Too bad you can't be modded +6. Replace those articles with your post and they would be far more effective at informing.
So, rabbits that got released in Australia are the top predator? The Pampas grass in California is the top predator? I can make a long list of invasive species that are not the top predator and still influenced their ecosystem a lot. Grass, as far as I know, is pretty much the bottom of the food chain.
Make sure you list the Aedes aegypti mosquito is on your invasive species list for the Florida Keys. Particularly relevant since those are the ones they are trying to get rid of. I don't think anybody release rabbits in Australia to control the invasive rabbit population.
That's because most physics and chemistry experiments don't breed and multiply.
This has the potential to affect people directly. They are not talking about an experiment somewhere in a lab. They are talking about something that happens literally in their own backyard. People are responsible for their own well-being, and they should understand the risks that affect their lives. They are right to do a risk assessment. They see a potentially large effect, and do not yet understand the chance of it going wrong, so they logically assume the worst and therefore scream and shout. It's up to those arrogant scientists to better explain the experiment that is about to take place in people's backyards.
Also, biology experiments have gone wrong before. Changing the balance in an ecosystem can have huge consequences.
They've done the same thing in the Cayman Islands. You can look there and see what the impact was.
There are over 80 different species of mosquitos in Florida. This method only targets one of those species. There will still be plenty of mosquitos.
That's a relief. For a second I was worried that this could get out of control and kill all of the mosquitoes.
The problem is that they are genetically modified, and the hippies refer to them as "GMO Mosquitos," and thus they are unnatural abominations. They think that the mosquitos will bite people and infect them with their GMO DNA, as if they were vampires that turn humans into giant GMO mosquitos. When informed that they are releasing males, and males don't bite, they either deny that males don't bite, or insist that the few females will still make it through will bite and infect people with their GMO DNA that will cause cancer, gluten intolerance (seriously, I heard that one today), kidney disease, heart disease, hyperthyroidism, IBS, ALS, MS, Parkinson's, birth defects, and a few others that I don't remember. And no, I am not making that shit up and I am not exaggerating, anti-GMOers' grasp on reality is approximately equal to Scientologists.
You heard somebody say that the bite from a GMO mosquito will cause gluten intolerance? boggle
Wait until they hear that the modified DNA for the mosquitoes is taken from herpes and E. Coli.
Heroin was the best medicine I ever had. It calmed me down, made me able to function without the constant "white noise" that makes me so anxious around people. The biggest problem with heroin was its illegality.
How much music has been produced on heroin? Charlie Parker, John Coltrane, Miles Davis, Keith Richards, Kurt Cobain, Chet Baker, Art Pepper, etc.
Charlie Parker had cirrhosis and died at 34, "The coroner who performed his autopsy mistakenly estimated Parker's 34-year-old body to be between 50 and 60 years of age."
John Coltrane died at 40
Miles Davis lived to be 65, so it doesn't seem like any drugs destroyed his life
Keith Richards is a skin-suit on a robotic exoskeleton
Kurt Cobain died at 27
Chet Baker died of accidental causes while high on cocaine and heroin at 58
Art Pepper died of a stroke...no idea if drugs contributed at all, but he was also only 56
I don't know if letting kids this age walk home is the right thing, but I respect the right of the parents to make that decision. The world over child services staff are self-righteous twerps, who give all the signs of knowing very little about the range of problems parents face, and know even less about helping, rather than punishing parents trying to do the right thing.
My parents were generally overprotective, and I was allowed to walk home from school every day when I was 7. There were many kids younger than that whose parents would let them walk home, and it was a lot farther than a mile. The next school year, I could ride my bike to and from school.
In Japan they have something called "first errand". Young school children, say 5 or 6, are given a simple task to do such as go to the local shop and buy a specific item, then bring it home. The school organizes this and gets the parents to come in and help by watching the children from a distance. Adults are not allowed to help the children unless they get into serious difficulty.
Haha, I've never heard of this, but that sounds very Japanese. Take something fairly ordinary and mundane, then turn it into a festival/ritual/rite of passage.
I hear you, but my genetics are corrupt and most people would never believe that I have lived through what I have. I would not want to relate any of the details. It would be irresponsible for me to father a child. Realizing that I don't have the emotional tools to deal with people on a normal level, much less raise a child, is something that I have come to grips with over a long process. My level of detachment and ability to withstand what would be torturous for most people makes me a good candidate to be a sort of martyr for those in similarly hellish situations but without the ability to express their feelings. You are right, and a wise old guy on the street told me something very similar, but this is "the work I don't want to do."
If you are genuine and not fabricating this homeless persona ("running to a chowline for lentis and rice", who talks like that?), then reducing everything to your "genetics are corrupt" is rather fatalistic and sounds like you're ignoring the real cause of your situation. If you truly would rather live in homelessness, then own it and acknowledge that it is your choice. Don't blame it on your genetics. You can't deal with people on a normal level because you don't have the emotional tools? Fine, neither can a lot of people and they find ways to work around that. You have options and aren't on a set course that you can't deviate from, so don't pretend or lie to yourself that that is the case.
I enjoy going full murder hobo in several games. Postal and Postal II were my absolute favorites.
My favorite was prompting mass social unrest in Syndicate. Gather up a huge crowd of civillians with the persuadatron, then go around killing a lot of cops so your persuaded citizens pick up their weapons, then turn off the persuadatron and watch as the civillians just start randomly shooting each other.
Sorry, if it is on the company's servers, then it is the company's data and not yours. You are not as important to the company as you think you are. If you *actually* are, then they will put you in an exception list. If the policy is causing the company to lose a lot of money from all the "waste of valuable company time", then it will either change the policy or go out of business.
Seems like it should be pretty basic stuff to a company as HUGE as Sony.
You're not thinking evil enough...this is advice for businesses. A subpoena can bridge an air gap.
So, the answer is "no". TaxACT will only do OCR on a PDF.
I switched to them couple of years back when Intuit decided that it will not allow web browsers running linux to the online version of TurboTax. Beats me why they did it. It worked perfectly the previous years. Anyway, TaxAct is cheaper and does the job just as well.
They had something screwed up last year at the beginning of tax season, but fixed it towards the end. Their support page looked like it was refreshingly flooded with complaints from Linux users. I tried filing my taxes early and ran into the "browser not supported" error that I couldn't get past, then jumped through some support hoops before deciding I didn't need to file taxes just then anyways. By the time I tried again in April, it was fixed. Which is a moot point now, since I'm not going to pay twice as much for their software this year.
No, but you tend to have more complex tax status... and to the GP's point, you really should be using a CPA. As worthless as my CPA is, I am happy to pay the $350 for him to dump my information into his program.
As for why the change... it is what the market will bear. It is a pain to do Schedule D and the accompanying forms now.
Why not save the the $300 and dump your information into a program yourself?
Yah, I worked at an ISP back then and it when customers would complain that they were getting a slow connection, I'd have them hold the phone up to the modem speaker and try to connect so I could hear it and determine the connection speed and protocol. The BONG! mentioned above pegs it as a 56k modem string :) v.90 i believe.
It is probably a little sad that my first thought when I saw the bongs was "that's 56k...n00b".
The ACA gathers money from those like myself who never get sick.
Look, there are real problems with the ACA, but this is not one of them. This is how insurance works. The problem is that it's actually a system of graft from stem to stern. The health insurance companies must be eliminated if we are to have working health care in America. That's how you know the ACA is a lie. If it were meant to help us, the insurance companies would be gone, because we would no longer need them.
But anything getting rid of the private health insurance companies would never have passed because Big Gubment can't tell those small business owners what to do.