Calling sugar "toxic" is probably a plot to demean the word "toxic" and make tobacco less regulated.
If you introduce the "Western diet" to cultures that don't have it, those people become hypertensive, get heart disease, obese, and die earlier.
Is there a more appropriate word than 'toxic'? Is "Really bad for you" somehow more politically correct?
Maybe it's not the fructose. Maybe it's the refined starches, or the bad fats, or the lack of vegetables. But the 100+ pounds of sugar a year can't be a nutritional benefit, unless you're riding the Tour de France - your body isn't evolved for that. Like they say, eat the outside of the supermarket, stay away from the middle.
I wonder if it would even have been physically possible to overbuild Fukushima to withstand this assault.
Of course it would have - they could have built a 45-foot tall seawall. Then when a 60-foot tsunami hit, we could all be having the same conversation.
This is known as the Godzilla argument. It eventually comes down to, "why didn't you build to withstand a Godzilla attack?". That this is a Japanese problem is merely coincidental (or unfortunate) to the argument.
Question is, would a public-run utility design and build nuclear infrastructure to within the letter of the law or would they 'overbuild' for safety?
There's a town near here where there's a road built next to a brook that stretches nearly the length of that town. That brook, during rainy periods, gets under the road (indirectly, through saturated soils) and wrecks the pavement with the freeze/thaw cycle.
So, every 10 years, for the past 60 years, the town embarks on a 4-year repaving project, where they rip up the old blacktop and put new blacktop down on a quarter of the road each year. It's junk within about 5 years.
Every privately maintained road in that area (shared roads, driveways, etc.) has been dug up, had gravel put down, had a layer of geotextile put down on that, then a proper roadbed (dirt or pavement) on top of that.
The Town won't do 1/10th of the road every year, fixing the roadbed as they go, because that would take too long. 60 years from now, it seems they'll be doing just the same thing.
It's worse than a corporation because there's no controlling external authority to hold them to a reasonable standard.
Her fluency aside, she probably doesn't have the vocabulary necessary to deal with the concepts dealt with at a parliamentary meeting. If she does, at age 10, I pity her.
Yeah, really. Your IT guy sounds abnormally reasonable. Give him the account and be glad the answer wasn't, "No and I'll be auditing you to find out why you're using unapproved equipment."
Seconded. He probably wants to be able to hop on the machine if it looks like it's causing trouble, to help you out (he may know more than you about your machine, consider it). By not asking for root, he's being a gentleman, but he may ask for root in the future if you don't do a good job adminning the machine.
I had a tech come out to troubleshoot, and he agreed that getting 30-40% of the service I pay for sounds broken to him, but Comcast hides behind their "based on network conditions" clause. It would be interesting if I could prove that I *never* get the advertised speeds, but testing that consistently would exceed my network cap.
Did the tech take readings on your cable with his meter? He should be able to tell you how much signal you're getting. Could be a crappy modem too.
The judge is not going to be fooled by this cute corporate trickery to evade responsiblity, and will rope the real prosecutors into the cases.
Do you think any real individuals will be held to account in the end? I doubt it - corporations were designed to make this kind of skullduggerous behavior acceptable.
Look at the right side of the graph. That's us, time 0, still in the upward swing. For whatever reason, this interglacial period looks most like one that's 61,000 years long, not the usual 12,000 year one.
One thing I found interesting that seems to be popular with new facilities like this one is omitting the clean agent fire suppression systems that used to be all the rage.
New data architectures make this possible. Facebook can lose a room full of equipment and not loose any significant data. It's probably cheaper to replace a room full of commodity servers than to maintain halon systems everywhere.
If I recall their replication correctly, if a sprinkler system took out a room full of servers, the data layer would increase redundancy of that data automatically (not really knowing why the servers went offline).
A few times a year I see a person who I can't readily determine the gender of. I'd like to see if this algorithm can teach me a thing or two (I won't be so crass as to photograph the person and run PatApp on the image).
Not all diseases are contagious. What if someone develops a thyroid issue and needs levothyroxine. Perhaps their blood sugar starts rising and they need metformin or insulin? What about blood pressure?
When every gram of cargo needs to be budgeted for, with our current level of technology, getting people out into space who will develop these conditions can only be seen as a failure of the screening process. Unfortunately for some of us would-be space adventurers, there are enough near-perfect humans who are qualified and eager to be astronauts.
If this still happened anyway, we'd probably carve out some space for the meds on the first re-supply ship, but it seems very doubtful we'd send more than the bare necessities on the initial voyage.
Sure, we're in an Ice Age, and in an interglacial period where we'd expect ice sheets to be retreating and temperatures warming, but give me money and power and I'll put a stop to it!
I went to check on one of the long videos I've recommended to folks and there was no download button. It seems that's only there for your own videos. Which seems odd, didn't Google Video used to always have a download button, for people who don't know how to find Flash cache files?
Anyway, it wasn't clear to me from the summary that this is only for your own files. Abandoned videos will be abandoned, apparently.
But, hey, good news, a better quality verison was on YouTube. This might even be the longest video I've ever seen on YouTube. (p.s. good documentary for history and/or economics geeks).
Yeah, this smells of the Schmidt-era silos. "Oh, we're YouTube, not Google Video". I'm surprised this decision made it past the new Larry/Sergey management team. Maybe it was decided a few months ago. But New-Again Google should be agile enough to undecide things.
250GB is easy to burn through if you are single, and EVEN EASIER to burn though if you are married and have kids.
Exactly. Just like water, phone, electricity, heating fuel, food, etc.
Which just goes to show that the fix-price-with-caps model is stupid with today's technology. A low entry fee with sensible usage fees is the only pricing model that will make sense until end-to-end fiber is the norm. At that point, when we can get 20 TB plans for an ounce of silver per month, then fixed rates will probably make sense. We just don't have the technology to handle that yet, and prices most efficiently allocate scarce resources.
Right, as the Internet gets better integrated into listening (Pandora, et. al) this is effectively the radio-station model, but with the ability to know precisely how big the audience is, how many people are listening to a song, how many people skip a song before it's over, etc.
The radio/ad model is well-established and successful. Google has the resources to bring this to the Internet level. Instead of getting paid 4 cents per song at iTunes, Google artists would only get paid half a cent per song impression, but sell a thousand times as many as at iTunes. And then there's still the offline listening option for people who hate ads or don't have a ubiquitous connection.
Slashdot Mirror
Calling sugar "toxic" is probably a plot to demean the word "toxic" and make tobacco less regulated.
If you introduce the "Western diet" to cultures that don't have it, those people become hypertensive, get heart disease, obese, and die earlier.
Is there a more appropriate word than 'toxic'? Is "Really bad for you" somehow more politically correct?
Maybe it's not the fructose. Maybe it's the refined starches, or the bad fats, or the lack of vegetables. But the 100+ pounds of sugar a year can't be a nutritional benefit, unless you're riding the Tour de France - your body isn't evolved for that. Like they say, eat the outside of the supermarket, stay away from the middle.
see subject and stop your silly ICMP filtering.
I wonder if it would even have been physically possible to overbuild Fukushima to withstand this assault.
Of course it would have - they could have built a 45-foot tall seawall. Then when a 60-foot tsunami hit, we could all be having the same conversation.
This is known as the Godzilla argument. It eventually comes down to, "why didn't you build to withstand a Godzilla attack?". That this is a Japanese problem is merely coincidental (or unfortunate) to the argument.
Question is, would a public-run utility design and build nuclear infrastructure to within the letter of the law or would they 'overbuild' for safety?
There's a town near here where there's a road built next to a brook that stretches nearly the length of that town. That brook, during rainy periods, gets under the road (indirectly, through saturated soils) and wrecks the pavement with the freeze/thaw cycle.
So, every 10 years, for the past 60 years, the town embarks on a 4-year repaving project, where they rip up the old blacktop and put new blacktop down on a quarter of the road each year. It's junk within about 5 years.
Every privately maintained road in that area (shared roads, driveways, etc.) has been dug up, had gravel put down, had a layer of geotextile put down on that, then a proper roadbed (dirt or pavement) on top of that.
The Town won't do 1/10th of the road every year, fixing the roadbed as they go, because that would take too long. 60 years from now, it seems they'll be doing just the same thing.
It's worse than a corporation because there's no controlling external authority to hold them to a reasonable standard.
Her fluency aside, she probably doesn't have the vocabulary necessary to deal with the concepts dealt with at a parliamentary meeting. If she does, at age 10, I pity her.
Yeah, really. Your IT guy sounds abnormally reasonable. Give him the account and be glad the answer wasn't, "No and I'll be auditing you to find out why you're using unapproved equipment."
Seconded. He probably wants to be able to hop on the machine if it looks like it's causing trouble, to help you out (he may know more than you about your machine, consider it). By not asking for root, he's being a gentleman, but he may ask for root in the future if you don't do a good job adminning the machine.
I can't think of any other natural shape for a tablet to be honest...
http://www.flickr.com/photos/30580398@N03/4768040515/
Corporations would sue their own children
TFTFY.
You could have known about this three months ago.
I had a tech come out to troubleshoot, and he agreed that getting 30-40% of the service I pay for sounds broken to him, but Comcast hides behind their "based on network conditions" clause. It would be interesting if I could prove that I *never* get the advertised speeds, but testing that consistently would exceed my network cap.
Did the tech take readings on your cable with his meter? He should be able to tell you how much signal you're getting. Could be a crappy modem too.
The judge is not going to be fooled by this cute corporate trickery to evade responsiblity, and will rope the real prosecutors into the cases.
Do you think any real individuals will be held to account in the end? I doubt it - corporations were designed to make this kind of skullduggerous behavior acceptable.
Look at the right side of the graph. That's us, time 0, still in the upward swing. For whatever reason, this interglacial period looks most like one that's 61,000 years long, not the usual 12,000 year one.
One thing I found interesting that seems to be popular with new facilities like this one is omitting the clean agent fire suppression systems that used to be all the rage.
New data architectures make this possible. Facebook can lose a room full of equipment and not loose any significant data. It's probably cheaper to replace a room full of commodity servers than to maintain halon systems everywhere.
If I recall their replication correctly, if a sprinkler system took out a room full of servers, the data layer would increase redundancy of that data automatically (not really knowing why the servers went offline).
A few times a year I see a person who I can't readily determine the gender of. I'd like to see if this algorithm can teach me a thing or two (I won't be so crass as to photograph the person and run PatApp on the image).
But he never makes any errors. And he paid good money for that comment, so it better darn-well be flawless.
Not all diseases are contagious. What if someone develops a thyroid issue and needs levothyroxine. Perhaps their blood sugar starts rising and they need metformin or insulin? What about blood pressure?
When every gram of cargo needs to be budgeted for, with our current level of technology, getting people out into space who will develop these conditions can only be seen as a failure of the screening process. Unfortunately for some of us would-be space adventurers, there are enough near-perfect humans who are qualified and eager to be astronauts.
If this still happened anyway, we'd probably carve out some space for the meds on the first re-supply ship, but it seems very doubtful we'd send more than the bare necessities on the initial voyage.
Sure, we're in an Ice Age, and in an interglacial period where we'd expect ice sheets to be retreating and temperatures warming, but give me money and power and I'll put a stop to it!
He was subsequently invited to apply to the San Fransisco force.
Anybody know if he wound up there? Apparently a mayor has the same name, so it's hard to search.
I went to check on one of the long videos I've recommended to folks and there was no download button. It seems that's only there for your own videos. Which seems odd, didn't Google Video used to always have a download button, for people who don't know how to find Flash cache files?
Anyway, it wasn't clear to me from the summary that this is only for your own files. Abandoned videos will be abandoned, apparently.
But, hey, good news, a better quality verison was on YouTube. This might even be the longest video I've ever seen on YouTube. (p.s. good documentary for history and/or economics geeks).
Yeah, this smells of the Schmidt-era silos. "Oh, we're YouTube, not Google Video". I'm surprised this decision made it past the new Larry/Sergey management team. Maybe it was decided a few months ago. But New-Again Google should be agile enough to undecide things.
Maybe I'm downloading the wrong stuff.
Try downloading the latest CentOS via torrent. There are 750 machines online now that can seed to you. 751 once I get to the office this afternoon.
Just because you and your grandmother only use it for email and printing out coffee cake recipes doesn't mean the rest of us do.
Grandma would appreciate on-demand coffeecake videos, if the technology were made accessible to her.
250GB is easy to burn through if you are single, and EVEN EASIER to burn though if you are married and have kids.
Exactly. Just like water, phone, electricity, heating fuel, food, etc.
Which just goes to show that the fix-price-with-caps model is stupid with today's technology. A low entry fee with sensible usage fees is the only pricing model that will make sense until end-to-end fiber is the norm. At that point, when we can get 20 TB plans for an ounce of silver per month, then fixed rates will probably make sense. We just don't have the technology to handle that yet, and prices most efficiently allocate scarce resources.
so say we all.
Right, as the Internet gets better integrated into listening (Pandora, et. al) this is effectively the radio-station model, but with the ability to know precisely how big the audience is, how many people are listening to a song, how many people skip a song before it's over, etc.
The radio/ad model is well-established and successful. Google has the resources to bring this to the Internet level. Instead of getting paid 4 cents per song at iTunes, Google artists would only get paid half a cent per song impression, but sell a thousand times as many as at iTunes. And then there's still the offline listening option for people who hate ads or don't have a ubiquitous connection.