Re:Hardass American Businessman
on
The Diamond Age
·
· Score: 1
Steve Jobs, that long-haired hippy freak kicked his ass pretty hard once he got back in control of Apple. The military is all about top-down command-and-control, conform-or-be-crushed, regimented no-questions-asked thinking. That ain't no way to run a business in today's world.
While a long haired hippy freak, I thought Jobs pretty much controlled Apple with an Iron Fist.
Seriously though, if you are going to have something that hot, you'd need to completely change the entire mainboard design.
I am not so sure this is a given. Heat production may stay in the 100W area. Temperature will go up though due to reducing the volume that heat is produced in, and the surface area the heat can be radiated from. So, the issue isn't so much making the motherboard fire proof or heat proof. The trick is making sure the heat produced by the CPU gets transferred to a larger volume that can radiate it away and maintain a lower temperature before it reaches something that might go up in smoke. This may even mean that you actually want an insulator between the motherboard and the CPU package. You will also want someway to prevent the pins from conducting heat to the motherboard.
Consider an Athlon that was half the surface area to radiate from but still produced 70W. You then put the same heat sink and fan as a current Athlon. What will happen is the chip will increase in temperature until the temperature difference between the heatsink and chip is sufficient to cause 70W to move to the heatsink. If the CPU will operate at that temperature, then there should not be a problem. And, the heatsink temperature should remain identical to a current Athlon. (excluding non-heatsink related heat dissipation)
If the GPL goes away, you still have the free ability to use the software -- but no ability to redistribute the product or create derivative works.
See I am not so sure about this still. Because if the GPL goes away then everything falls back to default copyright law. Doesn't that then mean you have an illegal copy of Linux because without the GPL the developers have given no one permission to copy it? Sort of like downloading warez, MP3, copying CDs...
Which would suggest that IBM has seen SCO and raised them. i.e. If SCO wants to try and charge people for licenses, and try to eliminate the GPL, IBM is going to make it so those people own illegal copies of Linux anyways. Which would make the SCO license worthless.
March 4th, 1989 was the day set forth that the government would start operating under the Constitution prior to that the government as we know it didn't exist and therefore cannot charge for freedom prior to that date.
1989? really? wow, I didn't think Papa Bush did anything good during his tenure, but I guess I was wrong.
Isn't 1789 the French Revolution? 1776 is USA independance.
March 4th, 1989 was the day set forth that the government would start operating under the Constitution prior to that the government as we know it didn't exist and therefore cannot charge for freedom prior to that date.
Also, it really depends on the person's world view whether he or she considers time to be a "separate real dimension" or just an illusion, a play of words.
The problem is that if time were simply an illusion then experiments would not be predictable. I could change how an event occurs simply by a change of observer. Yet, events occur at the same relative rate regardless of observer. Thus, there is a fundamental effect that we call "time" that regulates the rate at which events occur relative to each other. Whether time is a fundamental property of space-time, or something else will be dependent on some one coming up with a something else that makes different predictions than the space-time model.
An interesting thought would be to think that the speed of light is the fundamental universal clock. Everything occurs relative to the speed of light. This has interesting consequences because a change in the speed of light is impossible because there is no way to measure that change because any clock we would use to measure that change would have also changed proportionally. But, we could measure the rate of change of other processes relative to the speed of light. Of course, that would simply appear like the speed of light was changing, therefore making this world view useless.
Relating this back to the original article. His theory seems to just be a rejiggering of Heisenbergs uncertainty principle. Heisenberg says you can only know an objects position and velocity to a certain degree of accuracy at a given instant. This guy just says you can't know an objects position and velocity at an instant because there is no such thing as an instant. Doesn't really say anything new, or make any predictions that are not otherwise explained.
Make a wireless mesh network out of these. Remove the 56K modem form the Tiger Direct version and replace with an 802.11 card, then use the bootable ISO image from here to create a mesh metworked access point. The iDOT version may actually be better for this application due to lower power requirements. But I can't tell if it the case has the space for the singel PCI slot. Could be taken a step further and the CDROM removed and booted from compact flash, either with IDE to compact flash adapter?
At $400 for a MeshAP vs $169 + $50= $219 for an 802.11b card, I'll take the Lindows PC.
When doing aerobic exercise at low intensity, a larger percentage of the calories you burn will come from fat (50%). Alternatively, at high intensity, a larger percentage of the calories come from carbs / sugars (60%).
If you are controlling calorie intake that is pretty irrelevant. If without working out I burn 1800 calories a day, and I eat 1800 calories a day. And, My workout is worth 400 calories/day, then the extra 400 calories has to come form somewhere... You burn 400 calories of fat, whether it is during the workout or not doesn't matter.
Do you eat breakfast before or after your workout? I've tried working out in the morning, but it only made me feel sick. If I skipped breakfast, I was starving and sick. If I ate first, I was too full.
I swim, and prefer working out on an empty stomach. I swam mornings for a while and was unmotivated because dragging my butt out of bed at 6 am sucked. I did enough of that crap when I was swimming in college. I prefer swimming after work and don't have problems with time or energy. I say workout at whatever time you feel best.
So don't assume that just because slaker and I can't find any exercise we like, that we're depressed.
I was thinking, it probably has to do with negative reinforcement. If you start with too much, the activity is painful, which of course makes you have negative feelings about the activity and exercise in general. It is especially bad if you have not gone through it before. It is also especially bad if you have been overweight and sedentary for a long time. Giving your body a kick in the ass is not pleasant.
So, as another poster said, you have to start slow and easy, and gradually add more to the exercise. , and back off when you add too much too quick. By doing that you can avoid the pain that makes really difficult to start an activity and stick with it. Unless you intend to compete in somethign wokring out should feel good. Even, when training for competition it shouldn't hurt so much that it overcomes the seratonin high.
So what the hell do you do when there's absolutely nothing you like to do?
That is a tough one. I found something I like to do. Having all exercise feel like punishment is a tough situation. I think there are two things to watch out for. The first and easiest (you may have done this) is to make sure you don't over do it when you start. I know that even doing something I like, it is frustrating when I am off for a long time, then restart and over do it. It feels like punishment because it is too painful. So, the first thing is not to overdo it to where it does feel like punishment.
Assuming that is not the issue, the only thing you can do is keep looking. Do you like volleyball? There are sometimes groups that play a couple times a week. What about softball? Bowling? If you swim decent, but don't like the working out part see if there is a group that plays water polo. There is a Dad's team at the local high school here that plays twice a week. I know there are soccer teams in a lot of areas too. Golf is good too, find a public course with a good twilight rate and play 9 holes a couple hours before it gets dark. Get a pull cart and walk it. When I was in junior high I took judo which was fun. Aikido and tai chi are also pretty good. I don't prefer soft forms to hard forms like karate, taekwondo and kung-fu.
I think the key is to avoid the punishment part. Which is hard because you have had too many exercise experiences that equate to punishment, and if you start something for the purpose of exercise you are already prejudiced against it. It sounds like the main problem is mental, and you will have to figure out a way to fool yourself into doing somethign for fun that happens to get you a little exercise.
Since, I did the a similar weight loss plan. Here is my story.
I weighed 210 at the end of April 2003. Out of college in May 1996 I weighed 165. My goal was to get to 180 and then reevaluate. A few years earlier I had already eliminated the 32oz soda from my lunch, but still was adding weight.
So, to lose weight I reduced my calories to 1600/day. And, did 1 hour swim workouts 3-4 times/week.
Sample starting workout (distances in yards): 400 Warm up. 6x150 Pull/Kick/Swim on 2:45 3x400 on 7:00 (or some other 1200 yard set on 1:45/100 yards)
After 6 weeks: Changed to 4x400 on 6:20 (or some other 1600 yard set on 1:35/100 yards)
Every 3rd workout do 2500 yards easy to recover.
Now, I weigh 188. And, my main set is 2000yards on 1:30/100 yards. Another 5 seconds off my interval and that will be as fast as I was in college. I have also switched to 2 workouts a week with 30 minutes weights and 2000-2500 yards swim alternating with no wieghts and 3500 yards swim. I haven't done enough workouts in a row to worry about recovery.
Oh and 3 hours boogie boarding at Zuma Beach substitutes for a workout.:-)
When I get to 180. I want to increase my calorie intake to a maintenance level, and continue training. The way things are going I am hoping to be as fast or faster swimming than I was in college.
1. In order to store calories as fat, the body needs insulin to get the sugar from the blood into the cells. 2. Most carbohydrates drive up the blood-sugar level causing the release of insulin. 3. If you greatly reduce or eliminate carbs from your diet, you have a very hard time storing excess calories due to the short supply of insulin.
Let me suggest a different rationale. Have you ever looked at how many calories there are in various meats vs pasta/bread?
The most fatty highest calorie meat has between 80-90 calories per oz. Leaner meats fish and chicken are between 50-60 calories/oz. Most beef and lamb is in the 60-70 calorie/oz range.
Next look at a box of pasta... ~100 calories/oz (uncooked). Look at bread ~100 calories/slice. Look at other high carb foods (chips, pretzels). They tend to be in the 100 calories/oz range.
So, if you eat 16oz of lean meat you might get around 1000 calories at most. You eat 16oz(dry) of cooked pasta and end up at 1600 calories.
My hypothesis is that it is just easier to maintain calorie restrictions on a high protein diet because it harder to stuff the extra calories in your stomach. I think most diets and weight loss books are really about how to make eating less than you burn easier. For example:
1) Eating high protein makes it easier to eat fewer calories. 2) Eating breakfast every day give your metabolism a little noost early in the day, so you burn a few extra calories each day. 3) Drinking a lot of water can make you feel fuller, making it easier to eat less. 4) Eating 6 small meals each day prevents hunger pangs preventing binging, and helping maintain low calorie eating. 5) Eating give your metabolilsm a little boost, os more smaller meals gives youa bunch of littel boosts to help burn more calories. 5) Exercising increases daily calorie burn.
Really take a look at the little tricks you hear about dieting and they are pretty much all about helping people increase the calorie deficit with less pain.
This advice comes from some one who has lost 20 lbs in 12 weeks through exercise and 1600(initially)-1800(now) calories per day by just changing how much I eat, not what I eat.
If you get bored of water all day (understandable), you can try fruit juice. But please, do REAL fruit juice and not colored hummingbird food. Juicy Juice and Ocean Spray 100% are my favorites. Also, don't spend all day drinking it or 1) you'll go broke, and 2) food will seem to pass straight through you without slowing down.
Juice is OK, but be careful. The calories can add up fast. I did the math a while back and figured out that the 32oz soda at lunch was 500 calories. Juice has somehwat less calories per oz, but can still spank you.
So for those that exercise regularly, what keeps you from saying "aw, fuckit. I'll exercise tomorrow instead."? How do you keep motivated to do it?
This is one of those stupid sayings you hear, but the best exercise is the one that you will do. So, the key to exercising regularly is to find something you like doing. I enjoy swimming. I also swam competetively in high scool and college and coached some, so I know how to make good workouts. When I decided I needed to lose weight swimming was the obvious choice. So, find something you like and do that.
If you are looking for muscle gain, you may want to get the gym membership and a trainer. They can help with 2 things.
1) Diet. Get the calorie count, and food mix right so you can build the muscle as needed without putting on fat.
2) Teach you how to exercise correctly. Avoid over training and injuries.
If RedHat paid SCO they would be liable for copyright violation to every copyright owner of the kernel. That includes most hardware companies, the FSF, and hundreds of individuals...
An individual user could pay SCO some cash and not be liable, so long as they don't redistribute the kernel.
False. Because this means the user was not originally distributed the code according to the terms of the GPL. Some of the software in LInux that they received was not licensed under the GPL, therefore according to section 7 none of the code was distributed to them under the GPL. Therefore, the users have only those rights given to them under standard copyright law... NONE.
Actually, by purchasing a license to the SCO code they acknowledge that they know that they received Linux software that was not licensed under the GPL. This probably makes them ripe targets for a lawsuit by a Linux developer for stealing their software.
Paragraph 7 is not an out. If you can't distribute under the GPL, you can't distribute at all. Which means that they can't distribute Linux in ANY FORM.
I think they are trying to worm their way through this by claiming they ar eno longer distirbutiing the software, but are only licensing to those who already have the software. I doubt a court will find that convincing because what it means is that if the code in question was not distributed under the terms of the GPL, because it has SCO code, then it was illegally distributed period. And, therefore no one has a license for the software.
No one can ever be liable for a GPL violation merely by using the software.
How did you get the software in the first place? If it wasn't legally distributed to you, then how can it be legal for you to use it?
If SCO's allegations are true, and SCO does not license its code under the GPL. Then, the copy of Linux you have was illegally distributed to you in violation of the GPL. You had no right to receive the software and therefore have no right to use it. If you did not receive your copy in accordance to the rules of the GPL as the owners of the code intended, then you have stolen said code and are using it in violation of international copyright law.
You are not in violation of the GPL, you are in violation of international copyright law because you have software for which you had no license to receive.
He literally claims that developing any code for a UNIX clone violates UNIX IP rights, thus if you or I or anyone writes code for Linux, it belongs to SCO.
Not exactly. This claim is based on a clause in the original Unix License that says all modifications to Unix are covered by the license for the whole. (Not the exact wording.) He claims that any code written for a licensed Unix belongs to SCO. This is according to the license agreement signed by various Unix licensees. He cannot claim ownership of any code not written by a Unix licensee. The tricky part is how many Linux developers worked for a Unix licensee and are therefore tainted by that contract. My guess is quite a few, but at least a few Linux developers at no time came under the jurisdiction of the original Unix License, and therefore their code cannot be owned by SCO. Specifically, I don't believe Linus has ever been employed by a Unix licensee, and therefore SCO has no claim to his code.
His claim of ownership based on the Unix license terms may be somewhat spurious as well aside from the obvious. If I recall right, the terminology of that clause could also be interpreted as simply meaning that the Unix licensor gets rights to the modifications, but does not revoke rights held by the modifier. I.e. SCO can include code from Unix licensees in its Unix, but that does not give them any restrictions on what the original developer can do with that code. Sort of reminds me of the GPL...
Fine, but SCO is trying to charge people for code someone else distributed under the GPL for free.
Right, and as I stated in other posts their license scheme can't work. There are only two choices for SCO (assuming their code is in Linux) and neither choice involves getting license fees for LInux.
1) License their code in Linux under the GPL. 2) Sue everyone for copyright infringement and enjoint he usage of Linux with their code by anyone.
They cannot license their code in Linux under a different license other than the GPL. Otherwise, all the other code in Linux becomes unlicensed, and no one has the right to use or distribute said code.
This is simply another flaw in the GPL then, if the customers instantly have a COMPLETELY illegal copy of Linux, instead of just a partially illegal one. And it very well probably is, since I don't believe the GPL even addresses post-distribution illegalities whatsoever at all.
Well, the GPL is the license the developer's chose. The flaw I guess is that in order for to avoid the situation every developer would ave to agree to the change. It is easier for proprietary licenses because you have only one developer that can make changes to the licensing term if somethign came up. I guess the BSD license doesn't have this problem, but if BSD were tainted not even the developers could use, develop, or distribute without paying some one else, whicj would pretty much suck.
OK so here are some options for a poll. SCO: (1) Hasn't read the GPL (2) Thinks the GPL is a load of bull (3) Thinks that GPL won't hold up in court (4) Hopes that IBM will buy them out before going to court (5) Are a bunch of fscking idiots (6) First against the wall when the revolution comes (7) Will win and 0wnzor you all (8) Will be bought by CowboyNeal
(9) Don't think Linux developers will sue anyone over illegally using Linux code.
Again, who said they were? This is only a form of insurance for businesses whose linux plans are substaintial enough that they want protection from future litigation, and is not some new version of 'SCO Linux' that you now have to pay for. How hard is that to understand? Terribly, according to some of these posters.
Pretty stupid insurance considering that by purchasing it the business purchasing it acknowledges they received Linux in violation of the GPL, and therefore everything falls back to standard copyright law in which the purchaser has no rights whatsoever. So, the purchaser now has a license to use SCO's code, and no license for the rest of Linux.
Slashdot Mirror
Steve Jobs, that long-haired hippy freak kicked his ass pretty hard once he got back in control of Apple. The military is all about top-down command-and-control, conform-or-be-crushed, regimented no-questions-asked thinking. That ain't no way to run a business in today's world.
While a long haired hippy freak, I thought Jobs pretty much controlled Apple with an Iron Fist.
Seriously though, if you are going to have something that hot, you'd need to completely change the entire mainboard design.
I am not so sure this is a given. Heat production may stay in the 100W area. Temperature will go up though due to reducing the volume that heat is produced in, and the surface area the heat can be radiated from. So, the issue isn't so much making the motherboard fire proof or heat proof. The trick is making sure the heat produced by the CPU gets transferred to a larger volume that can radiate it away and maintain a lower temperature before it reaches something that might go up in smoke. This may even mean that you actually want an insulator between the motherboard and the CPU package. You will also want someway to prevent the pins from conducting heat to the motherboard.
Consider an Athlon that was half the surface area to radiate from but still produced 70W. You then put the same heat sink and fan as a current Athlon. What will happen is the chip will increase in temperature until the temperature difference between the heatsink and chip is sufficient to cause 70W to move to the heatsink. If the CPU will operate at that temperature, then there should not be a problem. And, the heatsink temperature should remain identical to a current Athlon. (excluding non-heatsink related heat dissipation)
Dastardly
If the GPL goes away, you still have the free ability to use the software -- but no ability to redistribute the product or create derivative works.
See I am not so sure about this still. Because if the GPL goes away then everything falls back to default copyright law. Doesn't that then mean you have an illegal copy of Linux because without the GPL the developers have given no one permission to copy it? Sort of like downloading warez, MP3, copying CDs...
Which would suggest that IBM has seen SCO and raised them. i.e. If SCO wants to try and charge people for licenses, and try to eliminate the GPL, IBM is going to make it so those people own illegal copies of Linux anyways. Which would make the SCO license worthless.
Dastardly
Maybe he meant 1781, the date of the US Constitution....
1781 was the Articles of Confederation.
Dastardly
March 4th, 1989 was the day set forth that the government would start operating under the Constitution prior to that the government as we know it didn't exist and therefore cannot charge for freedom prior to that date.
1989? really? wow, I didn't think Papa Bush did anything good during his tenure, but I guess I was wrong.
DOH!!!!! Drain Bamage...
Dastardly
1789 was the year the U.S constitution was signed, 1776 was the year the U.S decleration of Independence was signed.
North Carolina, Rhode Island, and Vermont had not ratified it yet. March 4th, 1789 was the day the government began operating under the Constitution.
Dastardly
Isn't 1789 the French Revolution? 1776 is USA independance.
:-)
March 4th, 1989 was the day set forth that the government would start operating under the Constitution prior to that the government as we know it didn't exist and therefore cannot charge for freedom prior to that date.
Datardly
Also, it really depends on the person's world view whether he or she considers time to be a "separate real dimension" or just an illusion, a play of words.
The problem is that if time were simply an illusion then experiments would not be predictable. I could change how an event occurs simply by a change of observer. Yet, events occur at the same relative rate regardless of observer. Thus, there is a fundamental effect that we call "time" that regulates the rate at which events occur relative to each other. Whether time is a fundamental property of space-time, or something else will be dependent on some one coming up with a something else that makes different predictions than the space-time model.
An interesting thought would be to think that the speed of light is the fundamental universal clock. Everything occurs relative to the speed of light. This has interesting consequences because a change in the speed of light is impossible because there is no way to measure that change because any clock we would use to measure that change would have also changed proportionally. But, we could measure the rate of change of other processes relative to the speed of light. Of course, that would simply appear like the speed of light was changing, therefore making this world view useless.
Relating this back to the original article. His theory seems to just be a rejiggering of Heisenbergs uncertainty principle. Heisenberg says you can only know an objects position and velocity to a certain degree of accuracy at a given instant. This guy just says you can't know an objects position and velocity at an instant because there is no such thing as an instant. Doesn't really say anything new, or make any predictions that are not otherwise explained.
Dastardly
Make a wireless mesh network out of these. Remove the 56K modem form the Tiger Direct version and replace with an 802.11 card, then use the bootable ISO image from here to create a mesh metworked access point. The iDOT version may actually be better for this application due to lower power requirements. But I can't tell if it the case has the space for the singel PCI slot. Could be taken a step further and the CDROM removed and booted from compact flash, either with IDE to compact flash adapter?
At $400 for a MeshAP vs $169 + $50= $219 for an 802.11b card, I'll take the Lindows PC.
Dastardly
When doing aerobic exercise at low intensity, a larger percentage of the calories you burn will come from fat (50%). Alternatively, at high intensity, a larger percentage of the calories come from carbs / sugars (60%).
If you are controlling calorie intake that is pretty irrelevant. If without working out I burn 1800 calories a day, and I eat 1800 calories a day. And, My workout is worth 400 calories/day, then the extra 400 calories has to come form somewhere... You burn 400 calories of fat, whether it is during the workout or not doesn't matter.
Dastardly
Do you eat breakfast before or after your workout? I've tried working out in the morning, but it only made me feel sick. If I skipped breakfast, I was starving and sick. If I ate first, I was too full.
I swim, and prefer working out on an empty stomach. I swam mornings for a while and was unmotivated because dragging my butt out of bed at 6 am sucked. I did enough of that crap when I was swimming in college. I prefer swimming after work and don't have problems with time or energy. I say workout at whatever time you feel best.
Dastardly
So don't assume that just because slaker and I can't find any exercise we like, that we're depressed.
I was thinking, it probably has to do with negative reinforcement. If you start with too much, the activity is painful, which of course makes you have negative feelings about the activity and exercise in general. It is especially bad if you have not gone through it before. It is also especially bad if you have been overweight and sedentary for a long time. Giving your body a kick in the ass is not pleasant.
So, as another poster said, you have to start slow and easy, and gradually add more to the exercise. , and back off when you add too much too quick. By doing that you can avoid the pain that makes really difficult to start an activity and stick with it. Unless you intend to compete in somethign wokring out should feel good. Even, when training for competition it shouldn't hurt so much that it overcomes the seratonin high.
Dastardly
So what the hell do you do when there's absolutely nothing you like to do?
That is a tough one. I found something I like to do. Having all exercise feel like punishment is a tough situation. I think there are two things to watch out for. The first and easiest (you may have done this) is to make sure you don't over do it when you start. I know that even doing something I like, it is frustrating when I am off for a long time, then restart and over do it. It feels like punishment because it is too painful. So, the first thing is not to overdo it to where it does feel like punishment.
Assuming that is not the issue, the only thing you can do is keep looking. Do you like volleyball? There are sometimes groups that play a couple times a week. What about softball? Bowling? If you swim decent, but don't like the working out part see if there is a group that plays water polo. There is a Dad's team at the local high school here that plays twice a week. I know there are soccer teams in a lot of areas too. Golf is good too, find a public course with a good twilight rate and play 9 holes a couple hours before it gets dark. Get a pull cart and walk it. When I was in junior high I took judo which was fun. Aikido and tai chi are also pretty good. I don't prefer soft forms to hard forms like karate, taekwondo and kung-fu.
I think the key is to avoid the punishment part. Which is hard because you have had too many exercise experiences that equate to punishment, and if you start something for the purpose of exercise you are already prejudiced against it. It sounds like the main problem is mental, and you will have to figure out a way to fool yourself into doing somethign for fun that happens to get you a little exercise.
Dastardly
Since, I did the a similar weight loss plan. Here is my story.
:-)
I weighed 210 at the end of April 2003. Out of college in May 1996 I weighed 165. My goal was to get to 180 and then reevaluate. A few years earlier I had already eliminated the 32oz soda from my lunch, but still was adding weight.
So, to lose weight I reduced my calories to 1600/day. And, did 1 hour swim workouts 3-4 times/week.
Sample starting workout (distances in yards):
400 Warm up.
6x150 Pull/Kick/Swim on 2:45
3x400 on 7:00 (or some other 1200 yard set on 1:45/100 yards)
After 6 weeks:
Changed to
4x400 on 6:20 (or some other 1600 yard set on 1:35/100 yards)
Every 3rd workout do 2500 yards easy to recover.
Now, I weigh 188. And, my main set is 2000yards on 1:30/100 yards. Another 5 seconds off my interval and that will be as fast as I was in college. I have also switched to 2 workouts a week with 30 minutes weights and 2000-2500 yards swim alternating with no wieghts and 3500 yards swim. I haven't done enough workouts in a row to worry about recovery.
Oh and 3 hours boogie boarding at Zuma Beach substitutes for a workout.
When I get to 180. I want to increase my calorie intake to a maintenance level, and continue training. The way things are going I am hoping to be as fast or faster swimming than I was in college.
Dastardly
1. In order to store calories as fat, the body needs insulin to get the sugar from the blood into the cells.
2. Most carbohydrates drive up the blood-sugar level causing the release of insulin.
3. If you greatly reduce or eliminate carbs from your diet, you have a very hard time storing excess calories due to the short supply of insulin.
Let me suggest a different rationale. Have you ever looked at how many calories there are in various meats vs pasta/bread?
The most fatty highest calorie meat has between 80-90 calories per oz. Leaner meats fish and chicken are between 50-60 calories/oz. Most beef and lamb is in the 60-70 calorie/oz range.
Next look at a box of pasta... ~100 calories/oz (uncooked). Look at bread ~100 calories/slice. Look at other high carb foods (chips, pretzels). They tend to be in the 100 calories/oz range.
So, if you eat 16oz of lean meat you might get around 1000 calories at most. You eat 16oz(dry) of cooked pasta and end up at 1600 calories.
My hypothesis is that it is just easier to maintain calorie restrictions on a high protein diet because it harder to stuff the extra calories in your stomach. I think most diets and weight loss books are really about how to make eating less than you burn easier. For example:
1) Eating high protein makes it easier to eat fewer calories.
2) Eating breakfast every day give your metabolism a little noost early in the day, so you burn a few extra calories each day.
3) Drinking a lot of water can make you feel fuller, making it easier to eat less.
4) Eating 6 small meals each day prevents hunger pangs preventing binging, and helping maintain low calorie eating.
5) Eating give your metabolilsm a little boost, os more smaller meals gives youa bunch of littel boosts to help burn more calories.
5) Exercising increases daily calorie burn.
Really take a look at the little tricks you hear about dieting and they are pretty much all about helping people increase the calorie deficit with less pain.
This advice comes from some one who has lost 20 lbs in 12 weeks through exercise and 1600(initially)-1800(now) calories per day by just changing how much I eat, not what I eat.
Dastardly
If you get bored of water all day (understandable), you can try fruit juice. But please, do REAL fruit juice and not colored hummingbird food. Juicy Juice and Ocean Spray 100% are my favorites. Also, don't spend all day drinking it or 1) you'll go broke, and 2) food will seem to pass straight through you without slowing down.
Juice is OK, but be careful. The calories can add up fast. I did the math a while back and figured out that the 32oz soda at lunch was 500 calories. Juice has somehwat less calories per oz, but can still spank you.
Dastardly
So for those that exercise regularly, what keeps you from saying "aw, fuckit. I'll exercise tomorrow instead."? How do you keep motivated to do it?
This is one of those stupid sayings you hear, but the best exercise is the one that you will do. So, the key to exercising regularly is to find something you like doing. I enjoy swimming. I also swam competetively in high scool and college and coached some, so I know how to make good workouts. When I decided I needed to lose weight swimming was the obvious choice. So, find something you like and do that.
If you are looking for muscle gain, you may want to get the gym membership and a trainer. They can help with 2 things.
1) Diet. Get the calorie count, and food mix right so you can build the muscle as needed without putting on fat.
2) Teach you how to exercise correctly. Avoid over training and injuries.
Dastardly
If RedHat paid SCO they would be liable for copyright violation to every copyright owner of the kernel. That includes most hardware companies, the FSF, and hundreds of individuals...
An individual user could pay SCO some cash and not be liable, so long as they don't redistribute the kernel.
False. Because this means the user was not originally distributed the code according to the terms of the GPL. Some of the software in LInux that they received was not licensed under the GPL, therefore according to section 7 none of the code was distributed to them under the GPL. Therefore, the users have only those rights given to them under standard copyright law... NONE.
Actually, by purchasing a license to the SCO code they acknowledge that they know that they received Linux software that was not licensed under the GPL. This probably makes them ripe targets for a lawsuit by a Linux developer for stealing their software.
Dastardly
Paragraph 7 is not an out. If you can't distribute under the GPL, you can't distribute at all. Which means that they can't distribute Linux in ANY FORM.
I think they are trying to worm their way through this by claiming they ar eno longer distirbutiing the software, but are only licensing to those who already have the software. I doubt a court will find that convincing because what it means is that if the code in question was not distributed under the terms of the GPL, because it has SCO code, then it was illegally distributed period. And, therefore no one has a license for the software.
Dastardly
No one can ever be liable for a GPL violation merely by using the software.
How did you get the software in the first place? If it wasn't legally distributed to you, then how can it be legal for you to use it?
If SCO's allegations are true, and SCO does not license its code under the GPL. Then, the copy of Linux you have was illegally distributed to you in violation of the GPL. You had no right to receive the software and therefore have no right to use it. If you did not receive your copy in accordance to the rules of the GPL as the owners of the code intended, then you have stolen said code and are using it in violation of international copyright law.
You are not in violation of the GPL, you are in violation of international copyright law because you have software for which you had no license to receive.
IANAL
Dastardly
He literally claims that developing any code for a UNIX clone violates UNIX IP rights, thus if you or I or anyone writes code for Linux, it belongs to SCO.
Not exactly. This claim is based on a clause in the original Unix License that says all modifications to Unix are covered by the license for the whole. (Not the exact wording.) He claims that any code written for a licensed Unix belongs to SCO. This is according to the license agreement signed by various Unix licensees. He cannot claim ownership of any code not written by a Unix licensee. The tricky part is how many Linux developers worked for a Unix licensee and are therefore tainted by that contract. My guess is quite a few, but at least a few Linux developers at no time came under the jurisdiction of the original Unix License, and therefore their code cannot be owned by SCO. Specifically, I don't believe Linus has ever been employed by a Unix licensee, and therefore SCO has no claim to his code.
His claim of ownership based on the Unix license terms may be somewhat spurious as well aside from the obvious. If I recall right, the terminology of that clause could also be interpreted as simply meaning that the Unix licensor gets rights to the modifications, but does not revoke rights held by the modifier. I.e. SCO can include code from Unix licensees in its Unix, but that does not give them any restrictions on what the original developer can do with that code. Sort of reminds me of the GPL...
Dastardly
Fine, but SCO is trying to charge people for code someone else distributed under the GPL for free.
Right, and as I stated in other posts their license scheme can't work. There are only two choices for SCO (assuming their code is in Linux) and neither choice involves getting license fees for LInux.
1) License their code in Linux under the GPL.
2) Sue everyone for copyright infringement and enjoint he usage of Linux with their code by anyone.
They cannot license their code in Linux under a different license other than the GPL. Otherwise, all the other code in Linux becomes unlicensed, and no one has the right to use or distribute said code.
IANAL
Dastardly
This is simply another flaw in the GPL then, if the customers instantly have a COMPLETELY illegal copy of Linux, instead of just a partially illegal one. And it very well probably is, since I don't believe the GPL even addresses post-distribution illegalities whatsoever at all.
Well, the GPL is the license the developer's chose. The flaw I guess is that in order for to avoid the situation every developer would ave to agree to the change. It is easier for proprietary licenses because you have only one developer that can make changes to the licensing term if somethign came up. I guess the BSD license doesn't have this problem, but if BSD were tainted not even the developers could use, develop, or distribute without paying some one else, whicj would pretty much suck.
Dastardly
OK so here are some options for a poll.
SCO:
(1) Hasn't read the GPL
(2) Thinks the GPL is a load of bull
(3) Thinks that GPL won't hold up in court
(4) Hopes that IBM will buy them out before going to court
(5) Are a bunch of fscking idiots
(6) First against the wall when the revolution comes
(7) Will win and 0wnzor you all
(8) Will be bought by CowboyNeal
(9) Don't think Linux developers will sue anyone over illegally using Linux code.
Dastardly
Again, who said they were? This is only a form of insurance for businesses whose linux plans are substaintial enough that they want protection from future litigation, and is not some new version of 'SCO Linux' that you now have to pay for. How hard is that to understand? Terribly, according to some of these posters.
Pretty stupid insurance considering that by purchasing it the business purchasing it acknowledges they received Linux in violation of the GPL, and therefore everything falls back to standard copyright law in which the purchaser has no rights whatsoever. So, the purchaser now has a license to use SCO's code, and no license for the rest of Linux.
IANAL
Dastardly