But...what was your body composition like at 230lbs? How tall are you? If you're short and quite fat at 230, then such a diet will drop a lot quick, then level out and not do much from there. It's the zone between "overweight" and "fit" that is hard to cross. That's where you need to moderate what you eat along with activity since either one on its own will only get you so far.
I'm about 6' and can bounce between 210 and 195 or so pretty easily on diet alone and just mountain biking on the weekends, maybe jog a few miles a day or two during the week. I didn't below 190 until I started excersizing during the week regularly along with moderating my diet. On the diet side, I did nothing extreme, just got used to eating smaller portions, only eat out once or twice a week, and for the rest of the time cook stuff I make at home. On the excersize front, I try to either run 2.5 miles or so each day or swim 500 yards (not so great with the swimming yet) in addition to mountain biking on the weekends. Weight-wise, I'm pretty steady in the low 180s with high 170s sometimes, but I would still classify myself as "out of shape" and certainly not really fit. I'll save that for when I can run a 5k before breakfast without feeling tired, or swim those 500 yards without feeling like I'm going to drown at the end.
You do realize you just made all that up... right?
I repeat my standing point that prior to modern times people were not fat and often ate lots of carbs. In fact, carbs are the staple calories of the entire modern world and have been for thousands of years.
Wheat, Rice, Potatoes, Maize... notice a pattern here?
That is what the modern world has been eating since the dawn of recorded time. Carbs. Where they fat? Nope.
What changes? The food? Nope. The activity? Yep. So... logically what caused this issue?
The activity.
End of discussion.
No, a lot changed. Everything you see and touch and do today, as yourself "did they have this way back when people weren't fat"? Food, activity, daily life. People also did not regularly stay up until 3am, so perhaps that is the problem.
That is why even organic meat contains sugar and all kinds of syrup nowadays.
Uh, what? Only processed foods, and then frankly, almost none of them. The lack of unnecessary ingredients is part of the draw to most Organic brands. Only the fake-ass organics like "O" (Safeway's brand) are full of bullshit like that.
There isn't any regulation around "unneccesary ingredients" in regards to organic foods. It mostly just means they aren't GMO and have used approved fertilizers and pesticides, which are about as toxic as the synthetic ones. Organic lunchmeat is still organic as long as the sugar and syrup it's loaded with is also organic.
Agile developers expect agile everything. Ubuntu happens to just be a happy compromise between agile and waterfall.
If you look at RHEL, it's 5-10 year old packages, kept alive by an enormous engineering team that backports fixes to old, dead software, which creates a huge pile of technical debt for any developer trying to use "modern", highly modular frameworks.
As far as developers go, In the Ruby, Python, and Node ecosystems, anything that's not the latest doesn't exist. They don't use the system package management, they use gem, pip, and npm. They really don't care about the underlying OS, until it gets in the way, and getting in the way is exactly what a decade-old OS does.
Just to throw out an example. Take some modern ruby on rails application, say Discourse. (discourse.org). Go download a tarball from github. Now try to make it work with nothing but software from the official RHEL repository. Let me know how that works out for you. After you tear out all your hair and skin trying to do that, try to get the pieces from 3rd party repos that will make that work. See how much you have to bring in as far as new libraries and new packages just to make it work. It's still a nightmare even with the 3rd party repos, and that RHEL support contract doesn't cover them - every single piece that's likely to break your application, is now outside of your support agreement, so your company is now wasting at least $799/year for support.
If modern, highly modern frameworks are interested in getting into the big enterprise space, then they will dedicate the time to making their software work with RHEL. If a company is running Ubuntu in production, then they don't particularly care that much about stability, have a small server install base, or a team that can hack around enough to make things work.
From working in Linux-based IT for nearly a decade now, IT departments get very frustrated by Red Hat's package management and the concept of needing both an Entitlement and various Channels to get updates; on the flip side of this summary is Ubuntu, which IT departments can't stand due to it's constant change and instable nature. Every IT department I've worked in and with seems to prefer administering and deploying Debian and battles with devs on Ubuntu and management on Red Hat.
How so? Most things these days have gone over to VM, so you buy an unlimited VM license for a host, and there you go. My channels are "Red Hat Enterprise Linux (core server)" and "Red Hat Enterprise Linux Server (v. 6)". There are a lot of more esoteric channels, but the core updates are pretty much all you need. If your environment is complex enough that you need packages from the other channels, then it should also be complex enough for Satellite and the extra special red hat sauce to make a point and click Linux enterprise.
- Useless on a server - where you only reboot 4 times a year or so and never have to hot-plug anything or change wireless networks.
Bull. Lots of servers currently run daemontools or similar, or else they use some other hack, because the SysVinit doesn't have any way to restart services (like crond) the one time they exit after running fine for months...
Alternatively, somebody has to take the time to set-up exhaustive monitoring, including ALL the trivial services running on the servers, and some dummy has to watch it around the clock, and manually perform this extremely simple and menial task. Or else maybe you're the dummy who gets paged at 3AM to do a trivial service restart, due to some simple and transitory event.
I would have been just as happy with upstart or anything else, but it was a dammed nuisance lacking that 30 year-old feature, and downright embarrassing that Linux still lacked it, while it's been working well in the base of Windows since the first version of NT.
You're going to need the exhaustive monitoring anyways. Just because you say "don't worry, it'll automatically fix itself" doesn't mean that anybody will buy it, and all it takes is the one time where things do not come back cleanly. That is going to happen.
Of the top ten States in terms of strictest gun laws, 7 have the lowest number of gun deaths.
You know when gun deaths were really low? Before guns were invented. The homicide rate, however, was about an order of magnitude higher than it is now.
Your statement is true, but utterly irrelevant to the question of where the safest places to live are. Does it matter what weapon is used to kill you? Or rob you or, rape you, or... Of course it doesn't. You have fallen victim to (or else are disingenuously pushing, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you're foolish, not malicious) to a very clever stratagem pushed by advocates of gun control: Focusing only on gun crime and ignoring other crime.
The statistic that matters isn't the number of gun deaths, it's the number of homicides, assaults, rapes, robberies, etc., total. And on any one of those scales, those states with strict gun laws don't do particularly well. To make them look good you have to do exactly what you did: arbitrarily exclude much of the violence.
Maybe because places that don't have a problem with crime in the first place don't care about making laws to restrict access to weapons?
I still fail to see what this buys you over a bunch of regular blades or rackmounts running your virtualisation platform of choice.
Best use-case proposal I've seen is for something like VDI. Instead of sharing the resources of one server, every desktop gets their own processor and memory.
The worst STEM majors earn more than the best high school graduates. Those in the bottom quintile of ability who go on to major in STEM have lifetime earnings of about $2.3 million, compared to $2 million for high school graduates in the top quintile of ability; business majors do slightly worse than STEM majors. The worst social science majors earn about the same as the best high school graduates, and the worst arts and humanities majors earn less.
Full time salaried job versus burger flipper - yes, that's what the degree gives you.
Why does "best high school graduate" mean burger flipper? There are plenty of trades that pay a good wagw where you will get ahead easier by putting in your time learning the trade than going to college. A lineman can pull down 6 figures, also plumbers, electricians, etc. "no college" doesn't mean "completely unskilled". Most of these jobs will be a straight 40 hours/week and done, so they are coming out ahead of a similarly paid computer scientist working 60 hour weeks.
On a side note, if you have an IQ of 150-170 and are not doing your own research or tinkering to come up with something new, you are wasting your brain. Start tinkering, start building, there HAS to be something you know you can do better or build better.
As for TFA's comment about dividend stocks... Yeah, they count as a pretty decent safe-haven in a bear market; but overall, they have a piss-poor return - Three to four percent sustained, at best. Beats (core) inflation, but not by much... Certainly not enough to retire on unless you literally sock away half of your paycheck for the next 40 years.
We appear unwaveringly headed for a securities market implosion, and not merely of the recession/depression kind, but something much, much worse.
3-4% with another 3-4% on top in dividends is in-line with the historic market gains. There's math involved, but how does that compound when the capital gains are recycled back into buying more of the same stock? No, I didn't read much of the article, so I don't know what it said about dividend paying stocks.
US voter turnout in presidential elections has been about 5x% of the voting age population for decades, and we are the "shining beacon of democracy" for the world.
Driving around "country roads" in Scotland, I was left with the impression that they don't really have "sides". You just go along down the middle until you come across an oncoming car, then rock/paper/scissors to decide who is going to back-up to a spot wide enough for two cars to pass or just pull into the sheep field. These "country roads" also seemed to be the most direct route from one place to another.
G+ is explicitly designed around this idea. That is the whole purpose of circles which is at the center of everything. You create a boss circle for those in your management-chain, a co-workers circle for the co-workers, a family circle for the wife, and a douche circle for all of the cute florists.
19x a tiny number is still a tiny number. These kinds of headlines always disappoint me since the pertinent information is buried far beneath the hyperbole. Thanks for digging it up.
I always get a bit of a laugh when an email comes through that a user tried to sudo su. Fortunately they haven't figured out the trick of using one of the programs with a shell escape, or even sudo bash.
The scary bit is when the audit trail just disappears or they don't followup with an email asking for something.
Jeez, 10? How much did that cost?...and if you didn't buy it, do you have any idea how much somebody probably would've paid for that UID before the looming beta threat.
EE degrees are a great example of the "misunderstanding" of what a college degree is. Nearly every Bachelor's program in E. Engineering from 4-year universities graduates people who have nearly Zero experience (directly or even on-paper) designing real-world projects. These degrees (arguably, like all degrees from 4-year universities) are *not* meant to be job training. They are meant to be education, useful for one to then go get job training.
It's the universities' own fault for pretending like these degrees will produce a job-ready, knowledgeable engineer.
I don't really feel misled by my university. They were pretty up-front that the degree was not a ticket to get a job designing the space shuttle, and at best the most we could expect was 4 years of a jobs doing testing and validation before touching design. After getting an EE BS, you're pretty much qualified to be an Engineer In Training, during that time is when you actually learn some EE stuff. Everything in undergrad is basically just providing a foundation to build upon.
Were I in the GP's position, then I would switch to patent law. That's not going to be outsourced, there's a "need" for law-types with a deep understanding of things like electrical engineering, you'll still kind of work with tech, and it pays a lot better. The "need" is largely because of the ridiculous patent situation in the US right now unfortunately, but there is a good chance you could be one of the good guys and work for companies that use what they make instead of the patent trolls.
Slashdot Mirror
But...what was your body composition like at 230lbs? How tall are you? If you're short and quite fat at 230, then such a diet will drop a lot quick, then level out and not do much from there. It's the zone between "overweight" and "fit" that is hard to cross. That's where you need to moderate what you eat along with activity since either one on its own will only get you so far.
I'm about 6' and can bounce between 210 and 195 or so pretty easily on diet alone and just mountain biking on the weekends, maybe jog a few miles a day or two during the week. I didn't below 190 until I started excersizing during the week regularly along with moderating my diet. On the diet side, I did nothing extreme, just got used to eating smaller portions, only eat out once or twice a week, and for the rest of the time cook stuff I make at home. On the excersize front, I try to either run 2.5 miles or so each day or swim 500 yards (not so great with the swimming yet) in addition to mountain biking on the weekends. Weight-wise, I'm pretty steady in the low 180s with high 170s sometimes, but I would still classify myself as "out of shape" and certainly not really fit. I'll save that for when I can run a 5k before breakfast without feeling tired, or swim those 500 yards without feeling like I'm going to drown at the end.
Does anyone know if its possible to eat a low carb diet as a vegetarian?
Yes
You do realize you just made all that up... right?
I repeat my standing point that prior to modern times people were not fat and often ate lots of carbs. In fact, carbs are the staple calories of the entire modern world and have been for thousands of years.
Wheat, Rice, Potatoes, Maize... notice a pattern here?
That is what the modern world has been eating since the dawn of recorded time. Carbs. Where they fat? Nope.
What changes? The food? Nope. The activity? Yep. So... logically what caused this issue?
The activity.
End of discussion.
No, a lot changed. Everything you see and touch and do today, as yourself "did they have this way back when people weren't fat"? Food, activity, daily life. People also did not regularly stay up until 3am, so perhaps that is the problem.
That is why even organic meat contains sugar and all kinds of syrup nowadays.
Uh, what? Only processed foods, and then frankly, almost none of them. The lack of unnecessary ingredients is part of the draw to most Organic brands. Only the fake-ass organics like "O" (Safeway's brand) are full of bullshit like that.
There isn't any regulation around "unneccesary ingredients" in regards to organic foods. It mostly just means they aren't GMO and have used approved fertilizers and pesticides, which are about as toxic as the synthetic ones. Organic lunchmeat is still organic as long as the sugar and syrup it's loaded with is also organic.
http://www.usda.gov/wps/portal...
Doesn't say anything about "no additives", only that any additives need to follow the same certification.
Such as? Any problems we've found can simply be fixed in the kickstart file we use.. It's a pretty small file :)
Yeah...takes about 10 minutes. Updates, custom local repos, AD integration, and everything.
Agile developers expect agile everything. Ubuntu happens to just be a happy compromise between agile and waterfall.
If you look at RHEL, it's 5-10 year old packages, kept alive by an enormous engineering team that backports fixes to old, dead software, which creates a huge pile of technical debt for any developer trying to use "modern", highly modular frameworks.
As far as developers go, In the Ruby, Python, and Node ecosystems, anything that's not the latest doesn't exist. They don't use the system package management, they use gem, pip, and npm. They really don't care about the underlying OS, until it gets in the way, and getting in the way is exactly what a decade-old OS does.
Just to throw out an example. Take some modern ruby on rails application, say Discourse. (discourse.org). Go download a tarball from github. Now try to make it work with nothing but software from the official RHEL repository. Let me know how that works out for you. After you tear out all your hair and skin trying to do that, try to get the pieces from 3rd party repos that will make that work. See how much you have to bring in as far as new libraries and new packages just to make it work. It's still a nightmare even with the 3rd party repos, and that RHEL support contract doesn't cover them - every single piece that's likely to break your application, is now outside of your support agreement, so your company is now wasting at least $799/year for support.
Here you go, seems straightforward and easy enough: https://meta.discourse.org/t/i...
If modern, highly modern frameworks are interested in getting into the big enterprise space, then they will dedicate the time to making their software work with RHEL. If a company is running Ubuntu in production, then they don't particularly care that much about stability, have a small server install base, or a team that can hack around enough to make things work.
From working in Linux-based IT for nearly a decade now, IT departments get very frustrated by Red Hat's package management and the concept of needing both an Entitlement and various Channels to get updates; on the flip side of this summary is Ubuntu, which IT departments can't stand due to it's constant change and instable nature. Every IT department I've worked in and with seems to prefer administering and deploying Debian and battles with devs on Ubuntu and management on Red Hat.
How so? Most things these days have gone over to VM, so you buy an unlimited VM license for a host, and there you go. My channels are "Red Hat Enterprise Linux (core server)" and "Red Hat Enterprise Linux Server (v. 6)". There are a lot of more esoteric channels, but the core updates are pretty much all you need. If your environment is complex enough that you need packages from the other channels, then it should also be complex enough for Satellite and the extra special red hat sauce to make a point and click Linux enterprise.
Bull. Lots of servers currently run daemontools or similar, or else they use some other hack, because the SysVinit doesn't have any way to restart services (like crond) the one time they exit after running fine for months...
Alternatively, somebody has to take the time to set-up exhaustive monitoring, including ALL the trivial services running on the servers, and some dummy has to watch it around the clock, and manually perform this extremely simple and menial task. Or else maybe you're the dummy who gets paged at 3AM to do a trivial service restart, due to some simple and transitory event.
I would have been just as happy with upstart or anything else, but it was a dammed nuisance lacking that 30 year-old feature, and downright embarrassing that Linux still lacked it, while it's been working well in the base of Windows since the first version of NT.
You're going to need the exhaustive monitoring anyways. Just because you say "don't worry, it'll automatically fix itself" doesn't mean that anybody will buy it, and all it takes is the one time where things do not come back cleanly. That is going to happen.
Of the top ten States in terms of strictest gun laws, 7 have the lowest number of gun deaths.
You know when gun deaths were really low? Before guns were invented. The homicide rate, however, was about an order of magnitude higher than it is now.
Your statement is true, but utterly irrelevant to the question of where the safest places to live are. Does it matter what weapon is used to kill you? Or rob you or, rape you, or... Of course it doesn't. You have fallen victim to (or else are disingenuously pushing, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you're foolish, not malicious) to a very clever stratagem pushed by advocates of gun control: Focusing only on gun crime and ignoring other crime.
The statistic that matters isn't the number of gun deaths, it's the number of homicides, assaults, rapes, robberies, etc., total. And on any one of those scales, those states with strict gun laws don't do particularly well. To make them look good you have to do exactly what you did: arbitrarily exclude much of the violence.
Maybe because places that don't have a problem with crime in the first place don't care about making laws to restrict access to weapons?
They have no way of predicting when an eruption might happen, but the potential seems greater than ever.
They say they can't predict it, then in the same sentence predict it. Amazing.
It only seems that way....like somebody was sitting there looking at Mt. Fuji and got the willies.
We got demoed this 6 months or so ago.
I still fail to see what this buys you over a bunch of regular blades or rackmounts running your virtualisation platform of choice.
Best use-case proposal I've seen is for something like VDI. Instead of sharing the resources of one server, every desktop gets their own processor and memory.
"How do you delete a file whose first character is '-'"?
FTFA:
The worst STEM majors earn more than the best high school graduates. Those in the bottom quintile of ability who go on to major in STEM have lifetime earnings of about $2.3 million, compared to $2 million for high school graduates in the top quintile of ability; business majors do slightly worse than STEM majors. The worst social science majors earn about the same as the best high school graduates, and the worst arts and humanities majors earn less.
Full time salaried job versus burger flipper - yes, that's what the degree gives you.
Why does "best high school graduate" mean burger flipper? There are plenty of trades that pay a good wagw where you will get ahead easier by putting in your time learning the trade than going to college. A lineman can pull down 6 figures, also plumbers, electricians, etc. "no college" doesn't mean "completely unskilled". Most of these jobs will be a straight 40 hours/week and done, so they are coming out ahead of a similarly paid computer scientist working 60 hour weeks.
On a side note, if you have an IQ of 150-170 and are not doing your own research or tinkering to come up with something new, you are wasting your brain. Start tinkering, start building, there HAS to be something you know you can do better or build better.
meh, that sounds like a lot of work
As for TFA's comment about dividend stocks... Yeah, they count as a pretty decent safe-haven in a bear market; but overall, they have a piss-poor return - Three to four percent sustained, at best. Beats (core) inflation, but not by much... Certainly not enough to retire on unless you literally sock away half of your paycheck for the next 40 years.
We appear unwaveringly headed for a securities market implosion, and not merely of the recession/depression kind, but something much, much worse.
3-4% with another 3-4% on top in dividends is in-line with the historic market gains. There's math involved, but how does that compound when the capital gains are recycled back into buying more of the same stock? No, I didn't read much of the article, so I don't know what it said about dividend paying stocks.
What if the idiot on your team *is* the bully.
US voter turnout in presidential elections has been about 5x% of the voting age population for decades, and we are the "shining beacon of democracy" for the world.
Driving around "country roads" in Scotland, I was left with the impression that they don't really have "sides". You just go along down the middle until you come across an oncoming car, then rock/paper/scissors to decide who is going to back-up to a spot wide enough for two cars to pass or just pull into the sheep field. These "country roads" also seemed to be the most direct route from one place to another.
G+ is explicitly designed around this idea. That is the whole purpose of circles which is at the center of everything. You create a boss circle for those in your management-chain, a co-workers circle for the co-workers, a family circle for the wife, and a douche circle for all of the cute florists.
19x a tiny number is still a tiny number. These kinds of headlines always disappoint me since the pertinent information is buried far beneath the hyperbole. Thanks for digging it up.
I always get a bit of a laugh when an email comes through that a user tried to sudo su. Fortunately they haven't figured out the trick of using one of the programs with a shell escape, or even sudo bash.
The scary bit is when the audit trail just disappears or they don't followup with an email asking for something.
Thanks for the clarification...you need a +6 informative. The article was pretty light on how NTP was being exploited for a reflection attack.
Jeez, 10? How much did that cost? ...and if you didn't buy it, do you have any idea how much somebody probably would've paid for that UID before the looming beta threat.
EE degrees are a great example of the "misunderstanding" of what a college degree is. Nearly every Bachelor's program in E. Engineering from 4-year universities graduates people who have nearly Zero experience (directly or even on-paper) designing real-world projects. These degrees (arguably, like all degrees from 4-year universities) are *not* meant to be job training. They are meant to be education, useful for one to then go get job training.
It's the universities' own fault for pretending like these degrees will produce a job-ready, knowledgeable engineer.
I don't really feel misled by my university. They were pretty up-front that the degree was not a ticket to get a job designing the space shuttle, and at best the most we could expect was 4 years of a jobs doing testing and validation before touching design. After getting an EE BS, you're pretty much qualified to be an Engineer In Training, during that time is when you actually learn some EE stuff. Everything in undergrad is basically just providing a foundation to build upon.
Were I in the GP's position, then I would switch to patent law. That's not going to be outsourced, there's a "need" for law-types with a deep understanding of things like electrical engineering, you'll still kind of work with tech, and it pays a lot better. The "need" is largely because of the ridiculous patent situation in the US right now unfortunately, but there is a good chance you could be one of the good guys and work for companies that use what they make instead of the patent trolls.