BTW - The article is wrong - not everyone will be running a home server in 10 years. Most people don't want to be bothered, and won't want to spend the extra $$$ on electricity, etc. Cheaper and easier to just have one family member/friend run a linux/bsd box and offer user accounts with ssh, sftp, and ~usr/public_html access (or symlink/home/user/public_html/htdocs/user for people who can't figure out how to type a tilde.
"You need to type a tilde before your user name in the url."
"A what?"
"A tilde."
"I don't have a tilt key on my keyboard."
"Not tilt - tilde!"
"What's a tilde?"
"That squiggly line thingee."
"Oh, okay."... pause...
I can't find it.
"The one next to the one."
"The one next to which key?"
"The one."
"I've got over a hundred keys... which one?"
"The one."
"... yeah, sure... quit pulling my leg - there's really no such thing as a tilt key, is there? This is a joke, like the "any" key."
(- click - account deleted)
Dietary fructose reduces circulating insulin and leptin, attenuates postprandial suppression of ghrelin, and increases triglycerides in women.
Teff KL, Elliott SS, Tschop M, Kieffer TJ, Rader D, Heiman M, Townsend RR, Keim NL, D'Alessio D, Havel PJ.
Monell Chemical Senses Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia 19104, USA.
Previous studies indicate that leptin secretion is regulated by insulin-mediated glucose metabolism. Because fructose, unlike glucose, does not stimulate insulin secretion, we hypothesized that meals high in fructose would result in lower leptin concentrations than meals containing the same amount of glucose. Blood samples were collected every 30-60 min for 24 h from 12 normal-weight women on 2 randomized days during which the subjects consumed three meals containing 55, 30, and 15% of total kilocalories as carbohydrate, fat, and protein, respectively, with 30% of kilocalories as either a fructose-sweetened [high fructose (HFr)] or glucose-sweetened [high glucose (HGl)] beverage. Meals were isocaloric in the two treatments. Postprandial glycemic excursions were reduced by 66 +/- 12%, and insulin responses were 65 +/- 5% lower (both P < 0.001) during HFr consumption. The area under the curve for leptin during the first 12 h (-33 +/- 7%; P < 0.005), the entire 24 h (-21 +/- 8%; P < 0.02), and the diurnal amplitude (peak - nadir) (24 +/- 6%; P < 0.0025) were reduced on the HFr day compared with the HGl day. In addition, circulating levels of the orexigenic gastroenteric hormone, ghrelin, were suppressed by approximately 30% 1-2 h after ingestion of each HGl meal (P < 0.01), but postprandial suppression of ghrelin was significantly less pronounced after HFr meals (P 0.05 vs. HGl). Consumption of HFr meals produced a rapid and prolonged elevation of plasma triglycerides compared with the HGl day (P < 0.005). Because insulin and leptin, and possibly ghrelin, function as key signals to the central nervous system in the long-term regulation of energy balance, decreases of circulating insulin and leptin and increased ghrelin concentrations, as demonstrated in this study, could lead to increased caloric intake and ultimately contribute to weight gain and obesity during chronic consumption of diets high in fructose.
Again... the process of breaking down the dissacharides raises the levels of leptin and insulin, whereas ingesting fructose does the opposite. The science is clear - your defense of fructose by saying its a byproduct is "junk science" - studies show the body doesn't act the way you assume it does.
Your theory sounds good, but it flies in the face of facts, facts that clearly show that fructose should not be used as a food additive.
People aren't being told that the calories they're taking in are worse than "empty". Sugar from sugar cane and beets are dissacharides - fructose is a monosaccharide. Dissacharides don't depress insulin and leptin levels - they increase insulin levels. Eat cane or beet sugar, and you body will "register" that you've taken in calories. Eat fructose, and it switches off (by depressing leptin levels) your ability to notice that you've eaten allthose calories - you still feel hungry.
So, we have a food industry that markets the equivalent of crack - the more you eat, the more your body says you have to eat - because it makes yor body tell your brain "I'm hungry."
A ban on fructose in favour of dissaccharides would drop obesity and overweight levels by more than half - rich OR poor.
More food industry bullshit - sugar made from sugar cane and beets is a dissaccharide - fructose is a monosaccharide. The body treats them differently - disaccharides don't depress the levels of insulin and leptin - monosaccarides do - which is why you continue to feel hungry even though you've taken in a gazillion calories in fructose.
Sugar from sugar cane and beets are dissacharides - fructose is a monosaccharide. Dissacharides don't depress insulin and leptin levels - they increase insulin levels.
So please don't buy into the food industry bullshit about fructose not being responsible, and being benign. Its making you fat.
Surgeon General says "y'all too fat, lardbutts"!
on
Longevity Gene Found
·
· Score: 2, Informative
"The life expectancy these days is longer than it has ever been,"
Wanna bet? Nothing has changed in the 3 years since this, except that people have continued to get fatter...
For Release on Delivery
Expected at 2:30 PM
on Tuesday, March 2, 2004
Good afternoon Mr. Chairman and distinguished members of the Subcommittee. My name is Dr. Richard Carmona, and I am the Surgeon General of the United States.
I want to take this opportunity to thank you for your service to our nation. I've had the honor of working with many of you, and I look forward to strengthening our partnerships to improve the health and well being of all Americans.
Mr. Chairman, thank you for your leadership in children's health and education. As the nation's doctor I thank you for taking steps to combat a growing epidemic in our country: childhood obesity. By calling this hearing you are telling Americans that there is a problem and that we need to work together to solve it.
I am joined by my colleague Dr. William Dietz, Director of the Division of Nutrition and Physical Activity at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Dr. Dietz and I will be available to answer any questions you may have.
President Bush, Secretary Thompson, and I have worked to raise public awareness of the need for a comprehensive recommitment to public health through prevention. The science is conclusive: by taking a few simple steps in our personal lives we can greatly improve our health and our nation's health, both today and in the future.
For example, the findings of the Department of Health and Human Services' Diabetes Prevention Program clinical trial showed that people with pre-diabetes can delay and even prevent Type 2 diabetes by losing just 5 to 7 percent of their body weight through moderate changes in diet and exercise. These lifestyle changes worked for people of every ethnic or racial group who participated in the study. The changes--such as walking for 30 minutes a day five days a week--are simple, and prove that small steps can bring big rewards.
We must increase our efforts to educate and encourage Americans to take responsibility for their own health. Over the past 20 years, the rates of overweight doubled in children and tripled in adolescents. Today nearly two out of every three American adults and 15 percent of American kids are overweight or obese. That's more than 9 million children--one in every seven kids--who are at increased risk of weight-related chronic diseases. These facts are astounding, but they are just the beginning of a chain reaction of dangerous health problems--many of which were once associated only with adults.
Today pediatricians are diagnosing an increasing number of children with Type 2 diabetes--which used to be known as adult-onset diabetes. Research indicates that one-third of all children born in 2000 will develop Type 2 diabetes during their lifetime. Tragically, people with Type 2 diabetes are at increased risk of developing heart disease, stroke, kidney disease, and blindness. These complications are likely to appear much earlier in life for those who develop Type 2 diabetes in childhood or adolescence.
Because of the increasing rates of obesity, unhealthy eating habits, and physical inactivity, we may see the first generation that will be less healthy and have a shorter life expectancy than their parents.
And the economic costs of obesity are staggering--second only to the cost of tobacco use. The annual cost of obesity is now estimated at up to $117 billion in direct and indirect costs.
The good news is that there is still time to reverse this dangerous trend in our children's lives. Today I will discuss two key factors to reduce and eliminate obesity in America: inc
Fructose depresses leptin and insulin levels. Leptin is normally produced when you eat, and this triggers the "ok, I'm no longer hungry" signal in your brain so you stop eating. Lowering the leptin level causes you to still feel hungry, even after you've eaten. Switching from fructose to sucrose will allow your body to regulate itself better.
Its probably going to take some major lawsuits (and bankruptcies) to fix this problem...
They're maximizing their profits - a dollar in hand today is worth more than a prospective dollar a year down the road, plus, over your (now shorter due to obesity) life-span, you'll end up spending several times more on pop and junk food because the fructose turns off the production of the "I'm not hungry any more" hormones.
A government-mandated switch from fructose back to ordinary sugar would cost them more than half their sales, but it would save tens of billions in health-care costs every year...
The 70-year-old said that he needs to go to the toilet first thing in the morning, and it takes him 10 minutes just to get out of bed, and another half-hour in the can, so he has to get up at 6:30 if he's going to make it for breakfast at 7:00
The 80-year-old said "You think that's bad? It takes me half an hour to get out of bed, and an HOUR in the toilet, so I have to get up at 5:30 in the morning if I'm going to eat breakfast at 7:00. Heck, I have to take half a viagra so I don't end up pissing on my slippers!
The 90-year-old says "You young'uns... I wake up at 6:55, have a piss, take a shit, and I'm all done by 7:00... then I have breakfast, while they change my sheets."
"Three people that live to 80 are the equivalent to 2 people that live to 120,"
So in theory, if I bump off 20 60-year-olds, I should live past 1,000... oh well, that's ONE way to save Social Security, but it sounds like voodoo math to me...
During 2005-2050, nine countries are expected to account for half of the world's projected population increase: India, Pakistan, Nigeria, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Bangladesh, Uganda, United States of America, Ethiopia, and China, listed according to the size of their contribution to population growth.
China, with 4 times the population, will grow less than the US.
Now keep in mind the US's environmental footprint (5% of the worlds' population, 26% of all energy consumption) - so as the US population more than doubles to 650 million, you're looking at some serious shortages.
An estimated 65 % of U.S. adults are overweight or obese, leading to an annual loss of 300,000 lives and at least $117 billion in health care costs in 1999.
In 2002, 61 % of U.S. credit card users carried a monthly balance, averaging $12,000 at 16 % interest. This amounts to about $1,900 a year in finance charges--more than the average per capita income in at least 35 countries (in purchasing power parity).
A nation drowning in debt at all levels, addicted to junk food, junk credit, and junk science for its environmental "policies".
"You can have my extended life gene when you pry it from my cold dead hands."
Seriously, if you want to extend life, ban fructose as a sweetener. Unlike regular sugar, fructose blocks the hormones that make you "feel full" so you continue eating and drinking (esp. soda pop). 2/3 of the population is overweight, and a LOT of those are obese. Of course, a fructose ban would result in lower sales of all junk foods (because you'll "feel full" sooner), so expect it to be fought by the manufacturers, who're just fattening you up fo the slaughter.
the headache you experience from a hangover IS in fact related to the blood vessels in your brain spasming because you're dehydrated. That's why drinking plenty of non-alcoholic fluids (not coffee or other caffeine-carrying liquids - that will dehydrate you even more) helps;
slashdot doesn't give karma for +1 Funny mods, so what happens if you get 5 * +1 Funny, and 5 * -1 Troll? You don't come out even - you're down 5 points. So people have taken to modding funny stuff insightful.
Re:What about the brain though.
on
Treating the Dead
·
· Score: 5, Funny
"It does not do any good to have a working body if I am still brain dead at the end of the process."
Why not? George Bush choked to death on a pretzel a few years ago, and nobody's noticed the difference...
"I recall reading an article in Science News late 70's or early 80's about some research showing it was the blood vessels in the brain spasming that lead to brain death."
... that's a hang-over. You just WISH you were dead...
Richard Stallman said that this won't happen again if MIT licenses their degrees under the new GPLv3.
In Soviet MIT, resume terminates YOU!
When asked to comment, the former Dean said "Only old Koreans need resumes."
Then Netcraft confirmed it - "MIT Dean of Admissions dying..."
SCO announced they'll sue both the former dean and MIT for violation of their "Intellectual Property" - specifically, "method and procedure to obtain money you don't have the paperwork for", citing their lawsuits against Novell and IBM even though SCO doesn't have the copyrights to Unix, or any documented proof. BF&S took the lawsuit - fees are capped at $2.47 or SCO's net worth, whichever is greater.
Fox is making a movie of the week about the whole scandal - they're trying to get Nathalie Portman to do the "younger Dean of Admissions" with hot grits
When told the news, Steve Ballmer misunderstood, and thought that MIT had been bought by Google. "I'll f*cking bury them! I've buried better schools than MIT!" New chairs have been ordered.
The Department of Homeland Security raised the threat level to red, and sent Immigration to arrest the former Dean. "We heard she's an undocumented worker; she's obviously a long-term mole, probably from the former Soviet Union, if she's been there for 28 years. We're working now to see which terrorist organisation she's currently aligned with."
Steve Jobs announced his new product at MacWorld - the iDegree. It will allow you to download your favourite transcripts, grades, courses, and graduate degrees into your own iResume.
Would someone like Bill Gates, who has three honorary doctorates cause an educational institution to lose their accreditation if he were to teach there?
If he were to be teaching computer security or safe coding practices, what do YOU think?
On the other hand, if he were to be teaching Propaganda 101...
I have met several IT and CS people in my life that were far smarter and better educated than Master degree holding fresh graduates.
One of the problems is it takes so long to untrain, then retrain, the grads. They're usually either pissed off or in denial when confronted with the fact that they spent years and money and sweat to learn stuff that was, in many cases, obsolete when they first applied to their school.
Almost everyone "puffs up" their resume. A good first step would be for people to stop handing out resumes in the first place. Or at the very least STOP PUTTING YOUR HOBBIES AND OTHER INTERESTS AND PERSONAL SHIT IN THEM!!! It just gives another reason to toss them in the bin as "freaking amateur". Also, don't try to make your labs sound lie they were real-world work. Trying to pass off your coursework as "real experience" is double-dipping (you already got "credit" for it with your sheepskin) as well as easy to see - 20 resumes, all with the same "coded x,y,z applications for the abc industry"... zzzzzZZZZZZZzzzzz... boring!
The problem with that, of course, is going into a different store from the same chain and finding out that your usual store is ripping you off on certain items.
This end up hurting "the brand", so franchisors won't do this at the store level, but at the chain level. Several chains tried doing this in the 60s by charging more to customers in the slums than in the suburbs, where there was more competition. Word of the practice got around, and people started voting with their feet - making the trek to the 'burbs. Turned out that the marginal increase in profit per item sold wasn't enough to offset the loss of customers, and the practice was, for the most part, abandoned.
However, you still see traces of it - suburban stores with more competition are more likely to have "in-store managers' specials" on a wider assortment of products.
Its been replaced by the tactic of opening up two or three stores in any one area (often just out of eyesight of each other) under different "banners", each one with a slightly different pricing strategy. People who don't bother going to all three to "bargain snipe" will end up paying more for some of the items they picked up - the laziness factor.
One good example of that is Loblaws/Maxi/Provigo - its all the same company, and if you pay attention, you can see the rotation of the specials between store brands. Ditto for Future Shop/Best Buy (okay - Future Shit/Worst Buy:-).
And then there's the danger of misinterpreting signals from larger sales because of a price drop with continual larger sales. Example: Store A lowers the price on item X by 50% - people rush out to stock up on item X. Store figures "great" - orders double the quantity of itme X - puts that out at the same sale price - and doesn't sell any. People who were in the market stocked up, and after seeing that the "sale price" is now the regular price, feel they've "been had."
Perhaps a better comparison would be with the stupid idea of your fridge keeping tabs of what you eat and re-ordering automatically. You bought some eggplant. You put it in the fridge. One day, you figure you'd better eat the eggplant or throw it out - so you eat part of it, decide you don't like it, and toss the rest.
Sure enough, your fridge orders another eggplant, which you put in the fridge so it won't go bad and stink up the place, and on garbage day you toss it... and the next morning, in comes, not 1, but 3 ^#$&* eggplants - the fridge saw there was a rising rate of consumption for eggplant, and ordered accordingly.
By the end of the month, there's nothing BUT eggplant in your fridge - so you pull the plug, and have a yard sale on eggplant. Soon, the whole naighborhood is having yard sales trying to get rid of their eggplants.
In the meantime, farmers have had their prices for eggplant bid up - so they plant more. Since they're planting more eggplant, they have less room to plant carrots. The price of carrots soars, while the price of eggplant crashes. People figure, hey, I've got these expensive carrots - might as well eat them - so this creates more demand for carrots, resulting in an even higher price - and panic hoarding. So farmers, seeig a chance to recoup on their eggplant losses, plant carrots. The market is now flooded with carrots, resulting in another market crash.
In case you think this is pure fantasy, we've seen this situation in real life, with programmed trading on the stock exchanges - both in causing stock to rise higher than it should have, and the reverse. It'll be interesting to see if the program can actually do any better than a "random walk" over the long term.
Slashdot Mirror
... which is why you need real competition and net neutrality ...
It's called "Windows Botnet Home Server Edition"
su root /etc/apache2.conf
:wq
vi
i
listen 8000
listen 8080
apache2ctl restart
There - fixed it for ya.
now type http://examplehomeserver.com:8000/ or http://examplehomeserver.com:8080/
BTW - The article is wrong - not everyone will be running a home server in 10 years. Most people don't want to be bothered, and won't want to spend the extra $$$ on electricity, etc. Cheaper and easier to just have one family member/friend run a linux/bsd box and offer user accounts with ssh, sftp, and ~usr/public_html access (or symlink /home/user/public_html /htdocs/user for people who can't figure out how to type a tilde.
Try this on for size:
= Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=15181085&dopt=Citatio n>?
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd
Dietary fructose reduces circulating insulin and leptin, attenuates postprandial suppression of ghrelin, and increases triglycerides in women.
Teff KL, Elliott SS, Tschop M, Kieffer TJ, Rader D, Heiman M, Townsend RR, Keim NL, D'Alessio D, Havel PJ.
Monell Chemical Senses Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia 19104, USA.
Previous studies indicate that leptin secretion is regulated by insulin-mediated glucose metabolism. Because fructose, unlike glucose, does not stimulate insulin secretion, we hypothesized that meals high in fructose would result in lower leptin concentrations than meals containing the same amount of glucose. Blood samples were collected every 30-60 min for 24 h from 12 normal-weight women on 2 randomized days during which the subjects consumed three meals containing 55, 30, and 15% of total kilocalories as carbohydrate, fat, and protein, respectively, with 30% of kilocalories as either a fructose-sweetened [high fructose (HFr)] or glucose-sweetened [high glucose (HGl)] beverage. Meals were isocaloric in the two treatments. Postprandial glycemic excursions were reduced by 66 +/- 12%, and insulin responses were 65 +/- 5% lower (both P < 0.001) during HFr consumption. The area under the curve for leptin during the first 12 h (-33 +/- 7%; P < 0.005), the entire 24 h (-21 +/- 8%; P < 0.02), and the diurnal amplitude (peak - nadir) (24 +/- 6%; P < 0.0025) were reduced on the HFr day compared with the HGl day. In addition, circulating levels of the orexigenic gastroenteric hormone, ghrelin, were suppressed by approximately 30% 1-2 h after ingestion of each HGl meal (P < 0.01), but postprandial suppression of ghrelin was significantly less pronounced after HFr meals (P 0.05 vs. HGl). Consumption of HFr meals produced a rapid and prolonged elevation of plasma triglycerides compared with the HGl day (P < 0.005). Because insulin and leptin, and possibly ghrelin, function as key signals to the central nervous system in the long-term regulation of energy balance, decreases of circulating insulin and leptin and increased ghrelin concentrations, as demonstrated in this study, could lead to increased caloric intake and ultimately contribute to weight gain and obesity during chronic consumption of diets high in fructose.
Again ... the process of breaking down the dissacharides raises the levels of leptin and insulin, whereas ingesting fructose does the opposite. The science is clear - your defense of fructose by saying its a byproduct is "junk science" - studies show the body doesn't act the way you assume it does.
Your theory sounds good, but it flies in the face of facts, facts that clearly show that fructose should not be used as a food additive.
Almost everything does - its cheaper, thanks to farm subsidies for corn.
Hey, maybe we can get Celine Dion to split a loaf of Wonder Bread with Ally McBeal?
People aren't being told that the calories they're taking in are worse than "empty". Sugar from sugar cane and beets are dissacharides - fructose is a monosaccharide. Dissacharides don't depress insulin and leptin levels - they increase insulin levels. Eat cane or beet sugar, and you body will "register" that you've taken in calories. Eat fructose, and it switches off (by depressing leptin levels) your ability to notice that you've eaten allthose calories - you still feel hungry.
So, we have a food industry that markets the equivalent of crack - the more you eat, the more your body says you have to eat - because it makes yor body tell your brain "I'm hungry."
A ban on fructose in favour of dissaccharides would drop obesity and overweight levels by more than half - rich OR poor.
More food industry bullshit - sugar made from sugar cane and beets is a dissaccharide - fructose is a monosaccharide. The body treats them differently - disaccharides don't depress the levels of insulin and leptin - monosaccarides do - which is why you continue to feel hungry even though you've taken in a gazillion calories in fructose.
Sugar from sugar cane and beets are dissacharides - fructose is a monosaccharide. Dissacharides don't depress insulin and leptin levels - they increase insulin levels.
So please don't buy into the food industry bullshit about fructose not being responsible, and being benign. Its making you fat.
"The life expectancy these days is longer than it has ever been,"
Wanna bet? Nothing has changed in the 3 years since this, except that people have continued to get fatter ...
http://www.surgeongeneral.gov/news/testimony/child obesity03022004.htm
All sugars promote tooth decay.
Also http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/medicalnews.php?ne wsid=65470, http://jcem.endojournals.org/cgi/content/full/89/6 /2963, http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/05/05050 3152956.htm
Fructose depresses leptin and insulin levels. Leptin is normally produced when you eat, and this triggers the "ok, I'm no longer hungry" signal in your brain so you stop eating. Lowering the leptin level causes you to still feel hungry, even after you've eaten. Switching from fructose to sucrose will allow your body to regulate itself better.
Its probably going to take some major lawsuits (and bankruptcies) to fix this problem ...
They're maximizing their profits - a dollar in hand today is worth more than a prospective dollar a year down the road, plus, over your (now shorter due to obesity) life-span, you'll end up spending several times more on pop and junk food because the fructose turns off the production of the "I'm not hungry any more" hormones.
A government-mandated switch from fructose back to ordinary sugar would cost them more than half their sales, but it would save tens of billions in health-care costs every year ...
3 men in an old-age home were comparing notes.
The 70-year-old said that he needs to go to the toilet first thing in the morning, and it takes him 10 minutes just to get out of bed, and another half-hour in the can, so he has to get up at 6:30 if he's going to make it for breakfast at 7:00
The 80-year-old said "You think that's bad? It takes me half an hour to get out of bed, and an HOUR in the toilet, so I have to get up at 5:30 in the morning if I'm going to eat breakfast at 7:00. Heck, I have to take half a viagra so I don't end up pissing on my slippers!
The 90-year-old says "You young'uns ... I wake up at 6:55, have a piss, take a shit, and I'm all done by 7:00 ... then I have breakfast, while they change my sheets."
"Three people that live to 80 are the equivalent to 2 people that live to 120,"
So in theory, if I bump off 20 60-year-olds, I should live past 1,000 ... oh well, that's ONE way to save Social Security, but it sounds like voodoo math to me ...
"I know that population rates decline on industrialized countries"
You want a real flame - try the truth, like this:
The US is going to be among the worst offenders in contributing to over-population over the next 40 years: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overpopulation
China, with 4 times the population, will grow less than the US.
Now keep in mind the US's environmental footprint (5% of the worlds' population, 26% of all energy consumption) - so as the US population more than doubles to 650 million, you're looking at some serious shortages.
Of course, there's always this "inconvenient truth" http://www.worldwatch.org/node/810
A nation drowning in debt at all levels, addicted to junk food, junk credit, and junk science for its environmental "policies".
Its the truth, and its also flamebait :-)
"You can have my extended life gene when you pry it from my cold dead hands."
Seriously, if you want to extend life, ban fructose as a sweetener. Unlike regular sugar, fructose blocks the hormones that make you "feel full" so you continue eating and drinking (esp. soda pop). 2/3 of the population is overweight, and a LOT of those are obese. Of course, a fructose ban would result in lower sales of all junk foods (because you'll "feel full" sooner), so expect it to be fought by the manufacturers, who're just fattening you up fo the slaughter.
"It does not do any good to have a working body if I am still brain dead at the end of the process."
Why not? George Bush choked to death on a pretzel a few years ago, and nobody's noticed the difference ...
"I recall reading an article in Science News late 70's or early 80's about some research showing it was the blood vessels in the brain spasming that lead to brain death."
Unless you're about to "go postal" you should be thinking 1st Amendment, not 2nd.
More on-topic - maybe they should look into moving to ibiblio.
Richard Stallman said that this won't happen again if MIT licenses their degrees under the new GPLv3.
In Soviet MIT, resume terminates YOU!
When asked to comment, the former Dean said "Only old Koreans need resumes."
Then Netcraft confirmed it - "MIT Dean of Admissions dying ..."
SCO announced they'll sue both the former dean and MIT for violation of their "Intellectual Property" - specifically, "method and procedure to obtain money you don't have the paperwork for", citing their lawsuits against Novell and IBM even though SCO doesn't have the copyrights to Unix, or any documented proof. BF&S took the lawsuit - fees are capped at $2.47 or SCO's net worth, whichever is greater.
Fox is making a movie of the week about the whole scandal - they're trying to get Nathalie Portman to do the "younger Dean of Admissions" with hot grits
When told the news, Steve Ballmer misunderstood, and thought that MIT had been bought by Google. "I'll f*cking bury them! I've buried better schools than MIT!" New chairs have been ordered.
The Department of Homeland Security raised the threat level to red, and sent Immigration to arrest the former Dean. "We heard she's an undocumented worker; she's obviously a long-term mole, probably from the former Soviet Union, if she's been there for 28 years. We're working now to see which terrorist organisation she's currently aligned with."
Steve Jobs announced his new product at MacWorld - the iDegree. It will allow you to download your favourite transcripts, grades, courses, and graduate degrees into your own iResume.
If he were to be teaching computer security or safe coding practices, what do YOU think?
On the other hand, if he were to be teaching Propaganda 101 ...
One of the problems is it takes so long to untrain, then retrain, the grads. They're usually either pissed off or in denial when confronted with the fact that they spent years and money and sweat to learn stuff that was, in many cases, obsolete when they first applied to their school.
Almost everyone "puffs up" their resume. A good first step would be for people to stop handing out resumes in the first place. Or at the very least STOP PUTTING YOUR HOBBIES AND OTHER INTERESTS AND PERSONAL SHIT IN THEM!!! It just gives another reason to toss them in the bin as "freaking amateur". Also, don't try to make your labs sound lie they were real-world work. Trying to pass off your coursework as "real experience" is double-dipping (you already got "credit" for it with your sheepskin) as well as easy to see - 20 resumes, all with the same "coded x,y,z applications for the abc industry" ... zzzzzZZZZZZZzzzzz ... boring!
The problem with that, of course, is going into a different store from the same chain and finding out that your usual store is ripping you off on certain items.
This end up hurting "the brand", so franchisors won't do this at the store level, but at the chain level. Several chains tried doing this in the 60s by charging more to customers in the slums than in the suburbs, where there was more competition. Word of the practice got around, and people started voting with their feet - making the trek to the 'burbs. Turned out that the marginal increase in profit per item sold wasn't enough to offset the loss of customers, and the practice was, for the most part, abandoned.
However, you still see traces of it - suburban stores with more competition are more likely to have "in-store managers' specials" on a wider assortment of products.
Its been replaced by the tactic of opening up two or three stores in any one area (often just out of eyesight of each other) under different "banners", each one with a slightly different pricing strategy. People who don't bother going to all three to "bargain snipe" will end up paying more for some of the items they picked up - the laziness factor.
One good example of that is Loblaws/Maxi/Provigo - its all the same company, and if you pay attention, you can see the rotation of the specials between store brands. Ditto for Future Shop/Best Buy (okay - Future Shit/Worst Buy :-).
And then there's the danger of misinterpreting signals from larger sales because of a price drop with continual larger sales. Example: Store A lowers the price on item X by 50% - people rush out to stock up on item X. Store figures "great" - orders double the quantity of itme X - puts that out at the same sale price - and doesn't sell any. People who were in the market stocked up, and after seeing that the "sale price" is now the regular price, feel they've "been had."
Perhaps a better comparison would be with the stupid idea of your fridge keeping tabs of what you eat and re-ordering automatically. You bought some eggplant. You put it in the fridge. One day, you figure you'd better eat the eggplant or throw it out - so you eat part of it, decide you don't like it, and toss the rest.
Sure enough, your fridge orders another eggplant, which you put in the fridge so it won't go bad and stink up the place, and on garbage day you toss it ... and the next morning, in comes, not 1, but 3 ^#$&* eggplants - the fridge saw there was a rising rate of consumption for eggplant, and ordered accordingly.
By the end of the month, there's nothing BUT eggplant in your fridge - so you pull the plug, and have a yard sale on eggplant. Soon, the whole naighborhood is having yard sales trying to get rid of their eggplants.
In the meantime, farmers have had their prices for eggplant bid up - so they plant more. Since they're planting more eggplant, they have less room to plant carrots. The price of carrots soars, while the price of eggplant crashes. People figure, hey, I've got these expensive carrots - might as well eat them - so this creates more demand for carrots, resulting in an even higher price - and panic hoarding. So farmers, seeig a chance to recoup on their eggplant losses, plant carrots. The market is now flooded with carrots, resulting in another market crash.
In case you think this is pure fantasy, we've seen this situation in real life, with programmed trading on the stock exchanges - both in causing stock to rise higher than it should have, and the reverse. It'll be interesting to see if the program can actually do any better than a "random walk" over the long term.
... or everyone can say "f*ck it" and go to school here.