Fresher tastes better. When you buy veggies from the store, it's typically well after they've been picked or whatever. Stuff out of your garden is nice and fresh, and tastes better.
That will depend on how good of a gardener you are and whether or not the place you live in has both the optimal weather and soil conditions for whatever it is you're trying to grow.
I often buy organic produce because it tastes better. I suspect that what's going on is that the organic stuff spends less time sitting around before I eat it.
That's typically not the case. Most organic food comes from large companies like ConAgra, and will be shipped around quite a bit. In addition, organic actually has a slight disadvantage here because you have to rely almost entirely on packaging in order to preserve it.
I think it was probably a few smaller nation's representatives just looking for cash. In terms of greenhouse gasses per capita, the US is something like 13th place, with at least some of the intended beneficiaries being not much better, and some being worse (i.e. Trinidad.)
Second of all, they don't have any kind of whitepaper or anything, just some unsubstantiated claims. Show me some peer reviewed evidence, with a clearly drawn cause and effect. Third of all, I've seen sites like this all the time, e.g. naturalnews.com, mercola.com, etc. They make these stupid wild claims with no scientific evidence and use "because it's natural" as their proof. (They also seem to attract a lot of conspiracy theorist types, electromagnetic hypersensitivity believers, anti-vaxers, etc, but that's another topic.)
The risk of organic spinich is about the same as conventional spinach
"But Francisco Diez-Gonzalez, a professor of food safety microbiology at the University of Minnesota's department of food science and nutrition, disagrees. In 2006, he published a study comparing E. coli contamination in organic and conventional produce. He concluded that the presence of E. coli seemed to depend more on the type of produce than whether it had been grown conventionally or organically.
"At this timeâ¦there is no sufficient evidence either epidemiological or scientific, to support the idea that organic produce is most likely to carry foodborne pathogenic bacteria," wrote Diez-Gonzalez in an email.....
Oh look, another spammy "natural is better" site! You pulled this straight from organicconsumers.org, no way that's biased! At least we have some scientific investigation going this time, which is an improvement over your previous "becuz mother earth sez!" article.
Well guess what, here's a less biased site, and it sheds a better light on the issue, specifically mentioning Professor Francisco Diez-Gonzalez:
A new study on food safety reveals that organic produce may contain a significantly higher risk of fecal contamination than conventionally grown produce.
A recent comparative analysis of organic produce versus conventional produce from the University of Minnesota shows that the organically grown produce had 9.7 percent positive samples for the presence of generic E. coli bacteria versus only 1.6 percent for conventional produce on farms in Minnesota.
The study, which was published in May in the Journal of Food Protection, concluded, "the observation that the prevalence of E. coli was significantly higher in organic produce supports the idea that organic produce is more susceptible to fecal contamination."
In addition, the study found the food-borne disease pathogen salmonella only on the organic produce samples. There was no evidence found of the deadly strain of bacteria, E. coli O157:H7, in either type of produce tested. The study looked at fruits and vegetables at the "preharvest" stage, not at the retail store level.
The principle investigator of the University of Minnesota study, Francisco Diez-Gonzalez, told CNSNews.com that "organic agriculture was more susceptible to carry fecal indicators."
"In many ways it is confirming what is believed, indeed, if you are using animal manure for fertilizer, the chances that you are going to get fecal bacteria on the product are greater," Diez-Gonzalez said.
Now granted, he goes on later to contradict himself somewhat, but if you read further on, a few more experts chime in and confirm everything mentioned above.
Alex Avery, director of research and education at the free-market Hudson Institute's Center for Global Food Issues, says the latest scientific study confirms years of research that organic produce may pose a higher risk for food-borne i
Problem with that is you don't gain the benefit of collisions that are probably less dangerous (less kinetic energy is required for movement) and no fuel savings (again, less kinetic energy.)
Send them to a farmers market and they'll happily buy and eat pesticide sprayed and GMO produce thinking it's "organic" - cause farmers know what "time to harvest" is for and cause their produce is FRESH.
There is an episode of Penn and Teller where they did exactly that, (AND at a farmer's market, with you know, you're vaunted "fresh" food) with a blind test, and they asked people who believed in the whole "organic tastes better" to try two different foods and ask which tasted better. 7 out of 10 of them identified the conventional farmed food as tasting better. Granted it's a small sample so not very scientific, but the show is intended to entertain. Still, it reflects similar scientific tests that have reached the same conclusion.
Another thing they did (not in the above linked video) was place two banana halves on a table and tell a lady that one was organic and one wasn't, and ask her which one tasted better. She talked about how the organic one tasted much creamer and much more like a banana, and the non-organic one tasted plain. Then it was revealed to her that they were two halves of the same banana.
Organic food is a religion. Plain and simple. There is zero evidence that it tastes better or is healthier other than a lot of bullshit anecdotes that people push around.
That's actually not a bad idea, but I'm pretty sure they can't label something as organic if it has been irradiated.
I would have to research that to be sure, but in general, when it comes to organic, technology is frozen in the 1950's, because according to organic dogma, technology = bad, because you know, it's not "natural", even though there's no scientific evidence that "natural" is better.
Free range chickens wander about over acres of grasslands eating bugs. Like wild caught salmon, eggs from these chickens are bright orange.
No, that just indicates what the chicken was fed, not whether it was allowed to walk around. Feeding them marigold flowers are enough to yield bright colored eggs, even if they were held in a feeder cage their whole life. Though some people claim the darker yolk is healthier. Personally I can't tell the difference in taste. Anyways, what the chicken is fed will obviously change the egg color and nutritional content, but that doesn't mean free range either tastes better or is healthier.
Organic food practices produce measurably better food (lower cholesteral, higher vitamins, lower saturated acids) with measurably lower results (50,000 survey in Britain showed lower weight and 9% lower lymphoma risk).
Hmm...While I haven't seen where you source this from, it doesn't sound likely.
First, dietary cholesterol (i.e. the cholesterol found in food that you eat) doesn't actually raise your blood cholesterol unless your liver determines that body is deficient in cholesterol, so I'm not sure how lower cholesterol is supposed to be a benefit. When people have high blood cholesterol, it's typically because they're consuming such a high amount of simple sugars (including "organic" sugar, if you want to go that route) that their liver is having to convert the excess glucose into lipids. If you've ever heard of how "foie gras" is made, this is basically what people with high cholesterol are doing to themselves. Simple sugars come from a lot of sources that you probably don't expect as well, like bread, fruit, rice, and pasta.
Second, you're going to need to be specific on vitamins, and more importantly, what the animal was fed. Yes, there will be a difference in nutritional content AND taste when it comes to say corn fed beef vs grass fed beef. Whether or not it's organic doesn't play a role in that however.
Third, saturated fats are actually not bad for you. The bad fats are trans fats, which aren't found in meat products unless they're fried or cooked using some kind of vegetable substance that has hydrogenated oils. The original fear for saturated fats came from the same false fear over dietary cholesterol. That is, they associated higher saturated fats with higher cholesterol. The reason this happened is because saturated fats from dietary sources help the body fill its own lipid needs faster, therefore when your liver produces its lipids, it creates more lipids that remain in the blood (cholesterol, triglycerides) thus making the numbers appear "worse".
Fourth and finally, you're going to see a reduction in disease among people who follow just about any controlled diet. The reason why is because these people tend to do less things that are well known to be dangerous like smoking, drinking, and drugs, and furthermore, they're more likely to exercise.
The largest cause of ecoli contamination is someone touched something's butt and then didn't wash their hands thoroughly. Use of recreational water on crops is another source of contamination.
No, it's not. There's actually a LOT of evidence that most e. coli and salmonella outbreaks are caused specifically by organic farming.
Organic spinach and sprouts in particular are especially risky. In fact, organic sprouts are so dangerous that big chain stores Kroger and Wal-Mart have an official policy to not carry them.
Even if he won the primary, there's no way in hell he'd win the general election. Even as somebody who generally favors the right side of the argument (mainly for economic concerns) I know that he'll get shit on in the general election.
Let's assume, for a second, that that didn't happen; you know that he can't do ANY of this without the approval of congress, right? And even then, the courts would easily throw out any laws that were passed because they go directly against the 5th and 14th amendments. The only possible exception is halting illegal immigration specifically.
Though personally, I think a better solution to accomplish what he's trying to get at is to end birthright citizenship, and then create an open border treaty with Mexico that also permits US law enforcement to pursue criminals for crimes (committed in the US) on both sides of the border, similar to what the EU already does. Likewise, permit Mexican law enforcement to do the same. This would also provide a mutual economic boon to both countries because trade ends up being less restricted.
So in addition to being a White person you are a STUPID White person.
So my comment about the KKK automatically means I'm white? At least we now know which one of us truly is a racist.
As for the KKK, this is their third iteration. The first one was quite violent. The second one identified itself as some weird Christian club which self-disbanded once its members found out that its leader was quite violent. The third one is mostly just a bunch of fat guys who hang out in the woods and talk about how much they really need new members. Seriously, that's what they do most of the time.
No, that's not it at all. It's organic farming. E. coli outbreaks are NOT AT ALL uncommon. Notice how they never had this problem prior to switching to organic?
Not only is organic food NOT beneficial from either a taste or health perspective, it's actually scientifically shown to be worse due to exactly this issue. Furthermore, it's bad from an environmental perspective because it requires more farmland, which means more water consumption and more deforestation where applicable.
Very true, and furthermore, short of hand-washing each leaf, there's no way they can guarantee against e. coli.
This all started because they wanted to appeal to the food religion by going organic, which means growing vegetables, literally, in cow shit. Synthetic fertilizer doesn't have this problem. It's not at all a coincidence that they had ZERO problems before that switch.
Progressive means striving for improvement. I don't think "we can do better" is smug or arrogant.
Please define improvement. Does improvement mean that the whole society becomes more Christian? Does improvement mean that we have less beer? Does improvement mean that we all become feminists? Does improvement mean that we all become atheists?
Because everywhere you look, you can find somebody that defines any one of these things as improvement. And if so, you'd be describing somebody like Warren Jeff's as progressive because he thinks his little Davidian like compound is an improvement over other places.
Not so much the layout as the size as well. Phoenix is laid out like this, only the area it covers is vast. We also have conduit everywhere, and even already existing fiber (both dark and otherwise.) Supposedly Tempe already hammered out an agreement for Google to begin deploying fiber here, until Cox sued the city to stop it from happening (I think that lawsuit is still pending.) Probably not coincidentally, Cox has been deploying its own FTTH services all over Tempe (or at least, there's city-placed orange signs everywhere indicating ordinances about Cox fiber service being deployed, similar to what happens i.e. during zoning changes) so perhaps it's just a play to beat Google to the punch, who knows.
Personally I hate the word progressive. It's a label that somebody applies to themselves when they think they've figured out the right answers to everything, and that only their opinion is the way forward. It's a very smug, asshole way of thinking. Examples of groups that have applied the "progressive" label to themselves include prohibitionists and fascists.
I'm a huge supporter of free speech, and structured or not, they shouldn't go around being the thought police. Don't like what somebody says? Let's chill their speech by doxing them and sending threats their way. Still don't like what they say? Let's silence them entirely by DDoSing their website.
I could get behind actions against ISIS because ISIS is a violent organization. The KKK isn't (except in very rare cases) and Donald Trump certainly isn't. The best way to let them fall is to let them continue speaking, while making sure anybody else can continue poking holes in their argument. We're already doing that quite well, and we don't need Anonymous silencing them.
Therm-trip feature. Basically the CPU resets itself when its internal thermal sensor indicates that its a few degrees (I think 5?) centigrade below catastrophic temperature point (where the blue smoke is released.) Still possible to damage the CPU, just very unlikely, and its not good on it if you keep it up long term.
That won't prevent applications from crashing (you'll get electron migration well before catastrophic temps) hence the game crashed, and you're guaranteed either a system freeze or a reboot.
Yeah, and that may be the forgotten lesson the new CEO is embracing. Even if you have really good, if not the best, of something in a sea of competition, if you try to force a monoculture you are going to drive people away.
Not even that, just trying to push your product into a saturated market period, and hoping that throwing enough money at it somehow improves your chances of gaining consumer mindshare.
The only reason xbox worked was because Nintendo was giving the middle finger to third party developers, while Sega failed to gain interest of third party developers, leaving just Sony, giving Microsoft room to be a second platform in the rule of three. Nintendo and Sega both ate shit that generation because when it comes to programming platforms, there's really a rule of two, because you're not just dealing with consumer adoption, you're dealing with third party developer adoption, and developers (especially smaller ones and upstarts) have little tolerance second platforms, and even less tolerance for distant third platforms.
Likewise, Windows Phone won't ever make it, no matter how much money Microsoft throws at it (besides, it really does suck anyways.)
Property doesn't grant copyright (i.e. the right to make copies.) Just as if you buy a copy of a CD, that copy becomes your property, but it doesn't entitle you the right to make copies and distribute (with the exception of fair use purposes.) It would need language like "you agree to transfer all copyrights to anything you upload", and good luck with that if their customers didn't own those rights to begin with (which in many cases they don't, i.e. Apple doesn't own the copyrights to its iTunes songs that it uploads to Microsoft's Azure cloud. And yes, iTunes IS hosted on Microsoft's Azure.)
No, the sticker is NOT guaranteed to work with a RETAIL or MSDN ISO.
There's an easy to make it work if it doesn't: Simply delete the ei.cfg file. In fact, that's the only thing that sets the difference between the different version discs since Vista and up.
There is also a z_a_D Loader (reverse those letters and remove the underscores) on that site. It could help you, in the case he has a Dell motherboard in a HP case, and wishes to have HP branding instead of Dell. Windows 7 only, and disk cannot have GPT. I know nothing about it though. You didn't hear it from me.
If you're going that route, then just use any ol' ISO you want (so long as hash is correct) and tell the Daz loader to activate based on your BIOS SLIC image. It will convert whatever you have to an OEM copy, and it won't even need to install its bootloader.
This is decidedly not true, even back in the Windows 98 days. From what I recall, all you had to do was to ensure that the disc had the same name.
This depends on a few things; namely, what retail copy did you buy? Not all of them are on MSDN, as that isn't its intent. In addition, as I stated, some tools add their own bits and do things in their own manner. Using a tool like dd will get you a proper hash, but again, assuming you have the right disc.
Also not true.
It's very much true, and nothing you say below contradicts what I said.
There's a way outside Microsoft to pre-activate software (at least Windows 7). All that are needed are some certificate files in the OEM/$$/OOBE section of your install DVD or USB.
Why go through all of that when you can just type in the key? Granted in some cases the ei.cfg file is set so that it's only for a certain edition, but if you simply delete it you don't have that problem.
Sadly, as of Windows 7, you can no longer slipstream service packs into your source discs, so you have to download each new version manually.
Not true, the process is just different. You can still slipstream drivers, updates, etc as well. You just have to use the dism tool on the WIM files. In fact, MDL describes that process quite well.
Uh this is no more secure than if you paid for a retail copy and also verified the SHA1 or purchased an MSDN subscription.
The problem with a retail copy is that your software that rips it is invariably going to place its own timestamps and other variations in the file, so your checksum likely won't be valid. An MSDN subscription is also likely too expensive for most people.
I realize it's fun to get modded up for encouraging pirating Windows but it's not really a behavior that should be supported.
If you buy a computer that has Windows installed, and it comes with a COA, then you already own a paid copy of Windows. If you look at the license terms, the COA itself is proof that you own a copy of Windows, and so long as you install the same edition (home, pro, etc) and license channel type (retail, upgrade, OEM) to match that COA, then it's not a pirated copy. Want a simple way to ensure that? Easy: Download the best version possible (i.e. for 7, get ultimate, for 8+, get pro) and then when it asks, just type in the key listed on the COA. It will automatically select the version you've paid for and install it, and likewise it will even activate just fine with Microsoft's servers (or call in, if necessary.)
Slashdot Mirror
Fresher tastes better. When you buy veggies from the store, it's typically well after they've been picked or whatever. Stuff out of your garden is nice and fresh, and tastes better.
That will depend on how good of a gardener you are and whether or not the place you live in has both the optimal weather and soil conditions for whatever it is you're trying to grow.
I often buy organic produce because it tastes better. I suspect that what's going on is that the organic stuff spends less time sitting around before I eat it.
That's typically not the case. Most organic food comes from large companies like ConAgra, and will be shipped around quite a bit. In addition, organic actually has a slight disadvantage here because you have to rely almost entirely on packaging in order to preserve it.
I think it was probably a few smaller nation's representatives just looking for cash. In terms of greenhouse gasses per capita, the US is something like 13th place, with at least some of the intended beneficiaries being not much better, and some being worse (i.e. Trinidad.)
See the studies on this page for measured differences between the types of eggs.
http://www.motherearthnews.com...
What a spammy, biased site. First of all, just about everything on that site falls afoul of this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Second of all, they don't have any kind of whitepaper or anything, just some unsubstantiated claims. Show me some peer reviewed evidence, with a clearly drawn cause and effect. Third of all, I've seen sites like this all the time, e.g. naturalnews.com, mercola.com, etc. They make these stupid wild claims with no scientific evidence and use "because it's natural" as their proof. (They also seem to attract a lot of conspiracy theorist types, electromagnetic hypersensitivity believers, anti-vaxers, etc, but that's another topic.)
The risk of organic spinich is about the same as conventional spinach
"But Francisco Diez-Gonzalez, a professor of food safety microbiology at the University of Minnesota's department of food science and nutrition, disagrees. In 2006, he published a study comparing E. coli contamination in organic and conventional produce. He concluded that the presence of E. coli seemed to depend more on the type of produce than whether it had been grown conventionally or organically.
"At this timeâ¦there is no sufficient evidence either epidemiological or scientific, to support the idea that organic produce is most likely to carry foodborne pathogenic bacteria," wrote Diez-Gonzalez in an email. ....
Oh look, another spammy "natural is better" site! You pulled this straight from organicconsumers.org, no way that's biased! At least we have some scientific investigation going this time, which is an improvement over your previous "becuz mother earth sez!" article.
Well guess what, here's a less biased site, and it sheds a better light on the issue, specifically mentioning Professor Francisco Diez-Gonzalez:
A new study on food safety reveals that organic produce may contain a significantly higher risk of fecal contamination than conventionally grown produce.
A recent comparative analysis of organic produce versus conventional produce from the University of Minnesota shows that the organically grown produce had 9.7 percent positive samples for the presence of generic E. coli bacteria versus only 1.6 percent for conventional produce on farms in Minnesota.
The study, which was published in May in the Journal of Food Protection, concluded, "the observation that the prevalence of E. coli was significantly higher in organic produce supports the idea that organic produce is more susceptible to fecal contamination."
In addition, the study found the food-borne disease pathogen salmonella only on the organic produce samples. There was no evidence found of the deadly strain of bacteria, E. coli O157:H7, in either type of produce tested. The study looked at fruits and vegetables at the "preharvest" stage, not at the retail store level.
The principle investigator of the University of Minnesota study, Francisco Diez-Gonzalez, told CNSNews.com that "organic agriculture was more susceptible to carry fecal indicators."
"In many ways it is confirming what is believed, indeed, if you are using animal manure for fertilizer, the chances that you are going to get fecal bacteria on the product are greater," Diez-Gonzalez said.
Now granted, he goes on later to contradict himself somewhat, but if you read further on, a few more experts chime in and confirm everything mentioned above.
Alex Avery, director of research and education at the free-market Hudson Institute's Center for Global Food Issues, says the latest scientific study confirms years of research that organic produce may pose a higher risk for food-borne i
Even post Dice slashdot isn't immune to dupes I guess:
http://science.slashdot.org/st...
Problem with that is you don't gain the benefit of collisions that are probably less dangerous (less kinetic energy is required for movement) and no fuel savings (again, less kinetic energy.)
Actually cow belching plays a bigger role than the farts do:
http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/...
Send them to a farmers market and they'll happily buy and eat pesticide sprayed and GMO produce thinking it's "organic" - cause farmers know what "time to harvest" is for and cause their produce is FRESH.
There is an episode of Penn and Teller where they did exactly that, (AND at a farmer's market, with you know, you're vaunted "fresh" food) with a blind test, and they asked people who believed in the whole "organic tastes better" to try two different foods and ask which tasted better. 7 out of 10 of them identified the conventional farmed food as tasting better. Granted it's a small sample so not very scientific, but the show is intended to entertain. Still, it reflects similar scientific tests that have reached the same conclusion.
Here, watch the whole thing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Another thing they did (not in the above linked video) was place two banana halves on a table and tell a lady that one was organic and one wasn't, and ask her which one tasted better. She talked about how the organic one tasted much creamer and much more like a banana, and the non-organic one tasted plain. Then it was revealed to her that they were two halves of the same banana.
Organic food is a religion. Plain and simple. There is zero evidence that it tastes better or is healthier other than a lot of bullshit anecdotes that people push around.
The local produce I buy or grow myself is fresh from the ground and tastes a hell of a lot better that what you'll find in a big box grocery store.
People say things like this all the time, but it never passes a blind taste test.
That's actually not a bad idea, but I'm pretty sure they can't label something as organic if it has been irradiated.
I would have to research that to be sure, but in general, when it comes to organic, technology is frozen in the 1950's, because according to organic dogma, technology = bad, because you know, it's not "natural", even though there's no scientific evidence that "natural" is better.
Free range chickens wander about over acres of grasslands eating bugs. Like wild caught salmon, eggs from these chickens are bright orange.
No, that just indicates what the chicken was fed, not whether it was allowed to walk around. Feeding them marigold flowers are enough to yield bright colored eggs, even if they were held in a feeder cage their whole life. Though some people claim the darker yolk is healthier. Personally I can't tell the difference in taste. Anyways, what the chicken is fed will obviously change the egg color and nutritional content, but that doesn't mean free range either tastes better or is healthier.
Organic food practices produce measurably better food (lower cholesteral, higher vitamins, lower saturated acids) with measurably lower results (50,000 survey in Britain showed lower weight and 9% lower lymphoma risk).
Hmm...While I haven't seen where you source this from, it doesn't sound likely.
First, dietary cholesterol (i.e. the cholesterol found in food that you eat) doesn't actually raise your blood cholesterol unless your liver determines that body is deficient in cholesterol, so I'm not sure how lower cholesterol is supposed to be a benefit. When people have high blood cholesterol, it's typically because they're consuming such a high amount of simple sugars (including "organic" sugar, if you want to go that route) that their liver is having to convert the excess glucose into lipids. If you've ever heard of how "foie gras" is made, this is basically what people with high cholesterol are doing to themselves. Simple sugars come from a lot of sources that you probably don't expect as well, like bread, fruit, rice, and pasta.
Second, you're going to need to be specific on vitamins, and more importantly, what the animal was fed. Yes, there will be a difference in nutritional content AND taste when it comes to say corn fed beef vs grass fed beef. Whether or not it's organic doesn't play a role in that however.
Third, saturated fats are actually not bad for you. The bad fats are trans fats, which aren't found in meat products unless they're fried or cooked using some kind of vegetable substance that has hydrogenated oils. The original fear for saturated fats came from the same false fear over dietary cholesterol. That is, they associated higher saturated fats with higher cholesterol. The reason this happened is because saturated fats from dietary sources help the body fill its own lipid needs faster, therefore when your liver produces its lipids, it creates more lipids that remain in the blood (cholesterol, triglycerides) thus making the numbers appear "worse".
Fourth and finally, you're going to see a reduction in disease among people who follow just about any controlled diet. The reason why is because these people tend to do less things that are well known to be dangerous like smoking, drinking, and drugs, and furthermore, they're more likely to exercise.
The largest cause of ecoli contamination is someone touched something's butt and then didn't wash their hands thoroughly. Use of recreational water on crops is another source of contamination.
No, it's not. There's actually a LOT of evidence that most e. coli and salmonella outbreaks are caused specifically by organic farming.
http://www.science20.com/scien...
http://www.realclearscience.co...
Organic spinach and sprouts in particular are especially risky. In fact, organic sprouts are so dangerous that big chain stores Kroger and Wal-Mart have an official policy to not carry them.
http://www.toledoblade.com/Ret...
Hate to break it to you
Even if he won the primary, there's no way in hell he'd win the general election. Even as somebody who generally favors the right side of the argument (mainly for economic concerns) I know that he'll get shit on in the general election.
Let's assume, for a second, that that didn't happen; you know that he can't do ANY of this without the approval of congress, right? And even then, the courts would easily throw out any laws that were passed because they go directly against the 5th and 14th amendments. The only possible exception is halting illegal immigration specifically.
Though personally, I think a better solution to accomplish what he's trying to get at is to end birthright citizenship, and then create an open border treaty with Mexico that also permits US law enforcement to pursue criminals for crimes (committed in the US) on both sides of the border, similar to what the EU already does. Likewise, permit Mexican law enforcement to do the same. This would also provide a mutual economic boon to both countries because trade ends up being less restricted.
So in addition to being a White person you are a STUPID White person.
So my comment about the KKK automatically means I'm white? At least we now know which one of us truly is a racist.
As for the KKK, this is their third iteration. The first one was quite violent. The second one identified itself as some weird Christian club which self-disbanded once its members found out that its leader was quite violent. The third one is mostly just a bunch of fat guys who hang out in the woods and talk about how much they really need new members. Seriously, that's what they do most of the time.
My guess is that it's just a lack of education on the part of the immigrant labor that's picking the produce.
Nope, this is why:
http://www.science20.com/scien...
No, that's not it at all. It's organic farming. E. coli outbreaks are NOT AT ALL uncommon. Notice how they never had this problem prior to switching to organic?
http://www.science20.com/scien...
Not only is organic food NOT beneficial from either a taste or health perspective, it's actually scientifically shown to be worse due to exactly this issue. Furthermore, it's bad from an environmental perspective because it requires more farmland, which means more water consumption and more deforestation where applicable.
Very true, and furthermore, short of hand-washing each leaf, there's no way they can guarantee against e. coli.
This all started because they wanted to appeal to the food religion by going organic, which means growing vegetables, literally, in cow shit. Synthetic fertilizer doesn't have this problem. It's not at all a coincidence that they had ZERO problems before that switch.
Progressive means striving for improvement. I don't think "we can do better" is smug or arrogant.
Please define improvement. Does improvement mean that the whole society becomes more Christian? Does improvement mean that we have less beer? Does improvement mean that we all become feminists? Does improvement mean that we all become atheists?
Because everywhere you look, you can find somebody that defines any one of these things as improvement. And if so, you'd be describing somebody like Warren Jeff's as progressive because he thinks his little Davidian like compound is an improvement over other places.
Not so much the layout as the size as well. Phoenix is laid out like this, only the area it covers is vast. We also have conduit everywhere, and even already existing fiber (both dark and otherwise.) Supposedly Tempe already hammered out an agreement for Google to begin deploying fiber here, until Cox sued the city to stop it from happening (I think that lawsuit is still pending.) Probably not coincidentally, Cox has been deploying its own FTTH services all over Tempe (or at least, there's city-placed orange signs everywhere indicating ordinances about Cox fiber service being deployed, similar to what happens i.e. during zoning changes) so perhaps it's just a play to beat Google to the punch, who knows.
Personally I hate the word progressive. It's a label that somebody applies to themselves when they think they've figured out the right answers to everything, and that only their opinion is the way forward. It's a very smug, asshole way of thinking. Examples of groups that have applied the "progressive" label to themselves include prohibitionists and fascists.
(BTW, I self identify as libertarian.)
I'm a huge supporter of free speech, and structured or not, they shouldn't go around being the thought police. Don't like what somebody says? Let's chill their speech by doxing them and sending threats their way. Still don't like what they say? Let's silence them entirely by DDoSing their website.
I could get behind actions against ISIS because ISIS is a violent organization. The KKK isn't (except in very rare cases) and Donald Trump certainly isn't. The best way to let them fall is to let them continue speaking, while making sure anybody else can continue poking holes in their argument. We're already doing that quite well, and we don't need Anonymous silencing them.
Therm-trip feature. Basically the CPU resets itself when its internal thermal sensor indicates that its a few degrees (I think 5?) centigrade below catastrophic temperature point (where the blue smoke is released.) Still possible to damage the CPU, just very unlikely, and its not good on it if you keep it up long term.
That won't prevent applications from crashing (you'll get electron migration well before catastrophic temps) hence the game crashed, and you're guaranteed either a system freeze or a reboot.
Yeah, and that may be the forgotten lesson the new CEO is embracing. Even if you have really good, if not the best, of something in a sea of competition, if you try to force a monoculture you are going to drive people away.
Not even that, just trying to push your product into a saturated market period, and hoping that throwing enough money at it somehow improves your chances of gaining consumer mindshare.
The only reason xbox worked was because Nintendo was giving the middle finger to third party developers, while Sega failed to gain interest of third party developers, leaving just Sony, giving Microsoft room to be a second platform in the rule of three. Nintendo and Sega both ate shit that generation because when it comes to programming platforms, there's really a rule of two, because you're not just dealing with consumer adoption, you're dealing with third party developer adoption, and developers (especially smaller ones and upstarts) have little tolerance second platforms, and even less tolerance for distant third platforms.
Likewise, Windows Phone won't ever make it, no matter how much money Microsoft throws at it (besides, it really does suck anyways.)
Property doesn't grant copyright (i.e. the right to make copies.) Just as if you buy a copy of a CD, that copy becomes your property, but it doesn't entitle you the right to make copies and distribute (with the exception of fair use purposes.) It would need language like "you agree to transfer all copyrights to anything you upload", and good luck with that if their customers didn't own those rights to begin with (which in many cases they don't, i.e. Apple doesn't own the copyrights to its iTunes songs that it uploads to Microsoft's Azure cloud. And yes, iTunes IS hosted on Microsoft's Azure.)
No, the sticker is NOT guaranteed to work with a RETAIL or MSDN ISO.
There's an easy to make it work if it doesn't: Simply delete the ei.cfg file. In fact, that's the only thing that sets the difference between the different version discs since Vista and up.
There is also a z_a_D Loader (reverse those letters and remove the underscores) on that site. It could help you, in the case he has a Dell motherboard in a HP case, and wishes to have HP branding instead of Dell. Windows 7 only, and disk cannot have GPT. I know nothing about it though. You didn't hear it from me.
If you're going that route, then just use any ol' ISO you want (so long as hash is correct) and tell the Daz loader to activate based on your BIOS SLIC image. It will convert whatever you have to an OEM copy, and it won't even need to install its bootloader.
This is decidedly not true, even back in the Windows 98 days. From what I recall, all you had to do was to ensure that the disc had the same name.
This depends on a few things; namely, what retail copy did you buy? Not all of them are on MSDN, as that isn't its intent. In addition, as I stated, some tools add their own bits and do things in their own manner. Using a tool like dd will get you a proper hash, but again, assuming you have the right disc.
Also not true.
It's very much true, and nothing you say below contradicts what I said.
There's a way outside Microsoft to pre-activate software (at least Windows 7). All that are needed are some certificate files in the OEM/$$/OOBE section of your install DVD or USB.
Why go through all of that when you can just type in the key? Granted in some cases the ei.cfg file is set so that it's only for a certain edition, but if you simply delete it you don't have that problem.
Sadly, as of Windows 7, you can no longer slipstream service packs into your source discs, so you have to download each new version manually.
Not true, the process is just different. You can still slipstream drivers, updates, etc as well. You just have to use the dism tool on the WIM files. In fact, MDL describes that process quite well.
Uh this is no more secure than if you paid for a retail copy and also verified the SHA1 or purchased an MSDN subscription.
The problem with a retail copy is that your software that rips it is invariably going to place its own timestamps and other variations in the file, so your checksum likely won't be valid. An MSDN subscription is also likely too expensive for most people.
I realize it's fun to get modded up for encouraging pirating Windows but it's not really a behavior that should be supported.
If you buy a computer that has Windows installed, and it comes with a COA, then you already own a paid copy of Windows. If you look at the license terms, the COA itself is proof that you own a copy of Windows, and so long as you install the same edition (home, pro, etc) and license channel type (retail, upgrade, OEM) to match that COA, then it's not a pirated copy. Want a simple way to ensure that? Easy: Download the best version possible (i.e. for 7, get ultimate, for 8+, get pro) and then when it asks, just type in the key listed on the COA. It will automatically select the version you've paid for and install it, and likewise it will even activate just fine with Microsoft's servers (or call in, if necessary.)