Mod up! Get them out of car lanes. Nothing more dangerous than rounding a corner at 45 and seeing a cyclist pop up in front of you going 15. Sometimes I think they WANT to get hit.
I think you missed the point. If graphic violence and murder is OK then banning swear words is just silly. Conversely, if somebody (kids) have ears too delicate to hear the f-word, then they sure as hell shouldn't be blowing people's heads off on the internet.
I draw the line at servers where gruesome graphic murder is OK but swear words are not.
Think of the children? Seriously??
That's just too messed up to support.
I think we're miscommunicating here. Or maybe I'm just communicating badly. My wife is an executive at one of the big 3 accounting firms, not a prairie mom. We're both willing to admit to each other that we're ruled by nature more than we'd like. I'm a guy, so certainly the differences between men and women can be frustrating to me and it's fun to vent that a bit. But differences do not make us unequal, in life or partnership.
"Making the moment" refers to the fact that men are almost always "in the mood." This doesn't seem true, in general, for women. That doesn't make us less equal. It just makes us different. Or are you saying you and your wife exert equal efforts over time in "setting the mood" or "making the mood". If so I'd strongly suspect that isn't the norm.
It's not chauvinistic to express personal frustration that stems from differences between men and women. It's OK to complain, or laugh, or poke fun as long as we laugh and poke fun at ourselves with equal gusto.
I apologize for thinking you sounded young and single. Honestly now I wonder if you're one of those totally PC types who's spent too much time in sensitivity training? If that's the case, maybe somebody needs to tell you that it's really OK to be a man. You can even pound your chest if you want and look at strange hotties when you're out and about. (there's that chauvanism again, so now I have to type out "attractive women" instead of "hotties"). While pounding your chest, it helps to laugh or growl, depending on your mood.;)
Actually, I got it from women who admit it, including my wife.
You sound very much like me when I was single. You're single aren't you?
I do the cooking, I work from home and take care of the kids 2-3 days per week.
My wife is my best fried and we communicate well. She's honest with me and herself.
I think your stereotype of men who are selfish in bed is outdated. Most men I know find turning their woman on and making her moan and quiver to be the biggest reward in bed. Unless my wife is a very good liar and faker, I'm damn good at that.
To be extra clear, when your wife tells you sincerely that seeing you labor around the house turns her on. Or when she gets excited and flirtatious the same week that you have a major business success, pay off a debt, or romance her like a princess, you'll get the idea. You'll notice things like the "nesting instinct". When your wife gets pregnant, you have to paint a bedroom, even if it's already an acceptable color. But I think the biggest factor may be worry and stress. A mortgage, kids, careers, they add a lot of stress as you age. My experience tells me men can be horny in the middle of a mountain of stress. They can pause for a quicky to relieve it. Women are wired to avoid sex when they're stressed. They're not in the mood. This makes sense. Nature prefers she wait for safety and security to bear a child. This brings up reproductive strategy. Man's best strategy for sewing his seed is quantity. Woman's is quality. Not quality of sex but quality of mate and moment. It's up to her mate to make the moment.
As you get older and more experienced, you'll probably realize that nature doesn't subscribe to our idealism, despite our best efforts.
What is it with you guys marrying these women that hate sex.[?]
The answer is quite simple. Women change dramatically the moment they get back from the honeymoon.
And again the moment they hold their first child.
They landed you and got the ring. They got what they wanted. So the first change really isn't a change for them, but it's a change for you. It means you get sex when they get what they want from you. E.g. a fatter wallet, painted house, or treated for a few days like a revered goddess, their list is endless. After the second change, you're not the love of their life anymore, they don't like the way they look in the mirror, and nothing is ever good enough (kids deserve better than your best). Which means most of us married men get sex once a month or so if we're lucky and we work at it. Glad you found a true sex addict! I hope she stays that way after kids.
And don't think I'm saying women are evil and mean to be this way. It's no more evil than us men developing very selective hearing over the years. We don't plan to become experts at tuning out the chatter and saying "uh-uh", "that's nice". We just do it naturally. Like a survival trait. Same thing.
I stream video and audio content to my PS3 via TVersity (and MediaTomb on a linux box) all the time.
WTF are you people watching? Seriously? When my day is over I crash on the couch late at night and I turn my TV to the On position and channel surf.
Last night Futurama: Bender's Game was on. Cool. When it's time to veg out on the couch and stare at the tube there's usually something to watch on regular old TV (cable, FIOS, DirecTV, whatever). If there's something really cool I need to find, there's DVDs. What's with all the extra boxes, streaming, transcoding, UPnP, etc. etc.?
I wonder if it's not just an excuse to toy with Linux? Honestly, what kind of video is worth all that thought and effort? The greatest movies ever made are available from netflix or the redbox for a buck. And then there's always books. What's the reward for all that time and effort to watch video? What am I missing?
The quote about protecting them because they feel pain almost dissolves their credibility for me when I read it. If Professor Bob Elwood and Mirjam Appel from the School of Biological Sciences at Queen's University, Belfast were working toward protections and regulations for crabs they'd be calling for sustainable harvest and healthy crab populations. They'd be talking to fishermen and doing see-bottom surveys. They'd be studying reproduction cycles and taking crab censuses.
Whether or not crabs feel and remember pain as we do is of interest to neurologists, behavioral scientists, etc.. The research is nifty enough on its own, for knowledge sake. There's no need to sound like a fruitarian over it. One might think Bob was just trying to make that "connection" between science and "the people" and didn't mean to come off sounding like a PETA zealot over what is essentially a giant bug. Either that, or somebody like PETA has some grant money...
I don't think its the safety technology or performance ability that's mostly to blame. It's the "comfortable drive". At some point the ability to feel the road and get actual feedback from your car became "uncomfortable". My wife's 2005 V6 Camry was a perfect example. Full of power, features like "traction control", and great cornering, yet it felt like driving a hovercraft. No feedback whatsoever. And the throttle was slow to respond when you needed a quick leap into moving traffic. There was a very palpable "pause & glide". Meaning even the gear ratio was for "comfort". I would describe it as a wonderfully built car that was dumbed down terribly for people who don't like feeling like they're driving. It was a version of "comfort" that made me very uncomfortable.
Her new no-frills Matrix 4-banger is a car for drivers. You can feel exactly what you're doing in that car and it responds very quickly. Much more economical too.
I am not surprised at this turn of events because Dawkins' comments in the God delusion are widely considered to be hateful in nature. Consider that, in the United states, some 93-96 percent of people believe in God and some 40% of people believe in evolution. The intersection of these two is still significant, but the symmetric difference of these axioms is not. Dawkins holds that to be an intelligent scientific thinker you must hold to both strict naturalism and evolution apriori, which is not so subtly implying that all of the other 53-ish percent of humans living in the United states are basically drooling morons.
>"public" and "on a website" are different things.
But your public salary is on display somewhere?
"But look, you found the notice didn't you?"
"Yes," said Arthur, "yes I did. It was on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying 'Beware of the Leopard'."
The whole problem with this law and the concept of "insurance" is that you have to continually prove your innocence or you are de facto Guilty. You could shoot a nude of a 40 year old women but if you don't have a record of her age then you're guilty of a crime.
I know we must all Think of Children all the time, but what if you had to continually register your possessions to prove you didn't steal them, or continually register your driving speed to prove you weren't speeding? We'd be all up in arms over the outrageous unconstitutionality of such laws. But point a camera at a naked body and all of the sudden it's ok to have laws just like Singapore or China.
> Never underestimate the stupidity of humanity when it comes to anything sex-related.
Interesting. The question seems to be one of scale. What works for viruses doesn't work so well for what I describe?
I was thinking building and updating the database and question algorithms would be far easier than reverse engineering it. Thus the system stays ahead of the bad guys in the same way AV software does. Guess it ain't so. It also amazes me the length and expense that spammers will go to for something that is 99.999 percent ineffective. There we are with scale again.
I was thinking brute force isn't feasible when every failure generates a new question.
But let me take another stab at it.
What if the question wasn't always "what is in the picture?"
Given a database of 1000 basic images like animals, shapes, fruits, and vegetables matched to the word for what each one is and it's catagory (animal, fruit, etc)..
Now the CAPTCHA shows 6 of them in 6 little squares. (~985 quadrillion combinations) It can ask a nearly endless list of questions using simple formulae:
What is the third image?
How many animals are shown? Spell the number.
Type the first 2 letters of each fruit.
Type the shape names using no spaces.
Instead of always asking "what are the 5 digits" now we're asking for an almost arbitrary number of digits. And there are 6 picture images that have to be ID'd.
Did I beat the OCR problem w/o introducing any fatal new ones?
Ok so I read the article... The article focuses on OCR as the main problem. CAPTCHA can be broken by OCR, so reCAPTCHA uses text that OCR has already had trouble reading. Ok got it.
So why are they stuck on ASCII characters? Why not use obfuscated animal pictures? "Type one word that best describes the picture above." Answer: Zebra (Moose, Dog, whatever) Why do they keep putting the right answer in the CAPTCHA? How about obfuscating "__ cups in a pint?" or "A Bakers Dozen is __". I'm no CMU whiz, but it seems to me that if the problem is OCR then stop putting the correct answer in ASCII characters right in the CAPTCHA.
It's not necessary to make them impossible to crack, it's only necessary to make it too economically infeasible for spammers to bother.
The difference is that we here in the USA (and we're not the only ones) have learned to live peacefully with our differences (for the most part). Most of us don't have the delusion that the world should be a homogeneous place and anyone that differs from us racially or religiously should be exiled or killed. You can find streets across our land where you'll see Jewish, Muslim, 67 flavors of Christian, atheist, Hindu, and Neo-Pagan folks in a rainbow of skin colors all doing business cheerfully with each other and chatting in line at the coffee shop. Sure there are issues. But at this point they're mostly "grown-up" issues. The "shitty holy land" is a shitty holy land because most of its inhabitants have not bothered to mature for the last 2000 years.
Right or wrong, this leaves many of us to believe that they are hopeless and should be treated as a blight upon humanity.
I'm sure we should be compassionate and feel sorry for them. Like a thoroughly sheltered and abused child who is thrust out of his/her commune into the wide modern world at age 18 with all kinds of issues and no coping skills. Except there are 2 of them from different communes and they've been assigned to the same dorm room. "Student Killing Spree! News at 11." Maybe I'm beating this metaphor to death, but the Holy Land is very much like that. Telegraph, Radio, Television, the Internet, quick plane flights, global commerce, etc. etc... The last century has a been a rude awakening to a sheltered antiquated culture (you might say 2 sheltered antiquated cultures). It's not entirely their fault. It's wrong, but it's all too easy to suggest sterilizing the "infection" festering over there.
eSATA is great for external drives that stay connected and turned on. But for removable (i.e. flash) drives they can be a pain. Every time you pop a card in or out and then reboot the BIOS makes you redefine Boot Order, eSATA drives are just like regular SATA drives, not a "removable device".
As a photographer who unloads about 20-30GB of raw files every week from CF cards in multiple readers, I'm pretty excited about USB 3.0.
I did a "thorough skimming" of every link, and I see no mention of light pollution or dark sky lighting?
WTF?!?! Somebody please tell me I missed it.
Re:Chiropractic treatment worked for me
on
Trick or Treatment
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
That's thing with Chiropractic... it's 85% bunk because it claims by "aligning your spine" it can heal all sorts of things.
Straight snag from Wikipedia: [ emphasis mine] Chiropractic... emphasizes diagnosis, treatment and prevention of mechanical disorders of the musculoskeletal system, especially the spine, under the hypothesis that these disorders affect general health via the nervous system.[1]... Chiropractic treatment focuses on manual therapy including spinal manipulation and other joint and soft tissue manipulation, and includes exercises and health and lifestyle counseling.[4] Traditionally, it assumes that a vertebral subluxation or spinal joint dysfunction can interfere with the body's function and its innate ability to heal itself.[5]
The bold stuff is the bunk. Complete garbage. But if they just said.. "Chiropractic.. we fix back problems." I think it would be a solid medical practice. Even evidence based. There is no doubt that electro-therapy applied to muscles relaxes spasms and reduces inflammation, that manipulating a sacroiliac joint for instance, back into alignment, definitely works.
I have recurring problems with my sacroiliac joints. I walk into a chiropractor so crooked and bent I look like I have severe scoliosis, with one leg longer than the other, in severe pain. I walk out straight and tall, with soreness instead of debilitating pain. Every time.
So yeah, mostly Chiropractic is bunk. But it can fix your back, "kinks" and spasms in your neck, a "thrown out" lower back, etc.
Slashdot Mirror
Mod up! Get them out of car lanes. Nothing more dangerous than rounding a corner at 45 and seeing a cyclist pop up in front of you going 15. Sometimes I think they WANT to get hit.
You're right, I did miss you point, sorry.
I still think if kids aren't old enough to hear or say swear words then they aren't old enough to send realistic corpses exploding into the air.
I think you missed the point. If graphic violence and murder is OK then banning swear words is just silly.
Conversely, if somebody (kids) have ears too delicate to hear the f-word, then they sure as hell shouldn't be blowing people's heads off on the internet.
I draw the line at servers where gruesome graphic murder is OK but swear words are not.
Think of the children? Seriously??
That's just too messed up to support.
I think we're miscommunicating here. Or maybe I'm just communicating badly. My wife is an executive at one of the big 3 accounting firms, not a prairie mom. We're both willing to admit to each other that we're ruled by nature more than we'd like. I'm a guy, so certainly the differences between men and women can be frustrating to me and it's fun to vent that a bit. But differences do not make us unequal, in life or partnership.
;)
"Making the moment" refers to the fact that men are almost always "in the mood." This doesn't seem true, in general, for women. That doesn't make us less equal. It just makes us different. Or are you saying you and your wife exert equal efforts over time in "setting the mood" or "making the mood". If so I'd strongly suspect that isn't the norm. It's not chauvinistic to express personal frustration that stems from differences between men and women. It's OK to complain, or laugh, or poke fun as long as we laugh and poke fun at ourselves with equal gusto. I apologize for thinking you sounded young and single. Honestly now I wonder if you're one of those totally PC types who's spent too much time in sensitivity training? If that's the case, maybe somebody needs to tell you that it's really OK to be a man. You can even pound your chest if you want and look at strange hotties when you're out and about. (there's that chauvanism again, so now I have to type out "attractive women" instead of "hotties"). While pounding your chest, it helps to laugh or growl, depending on your mood.
Actually, I got it from women who admit it, including my wife.
You sound very much like me when I was single. You're single aren't you?
I do the cooking, I work from home and take care of the kids 2-3 days per week. My wife is my best fried and we communicate well. She's honest with me and herself.
I think your stereotype of men who are selfish in bed is outdated. Most men I know find turning their woman on and making her moan and quiver to be the biggest reward in bed. Unless my wife is a very good liar and faker, I'm damn good at that.
To be extra clear, when your wife tells you sincerely that seeing you labor around the house turns her on. Or when she gets excited and flirtatious the same week that you have a major business success, pay off a debt, or romance her like a princess, you'll get the idea. You'll notice things like the "nesting instinct". When your wife gets pregnant, you have to paint a bedroom, even if it's already an acceptable color. But I think the biggest factor may be worry and stress. A mortgage, kids, careers, they add a lot of stress as you age. My experience tells me men can be horny in the middle of a mountain of stress. They can pause for a quicky to relieve it. Women are wired to avoid sex when they're stressed. They're not in the mood. This makes sense. Nature prefers she wait for safety and security to bear a child. This brings up reproductive strategy. Man's best strategy for sewing his seed is quantity. Woman's is quality. Not quality of sex but quality of mate and moment. It's up to her mate to make the moment.
As you get older and more experienced, you'll probably realize that nature doesn't subscribe to our idealism, despite our best efforts.
What is it with you guys marrying these women that hate sex.[?]
The answer is quite simple. Women change dramatically the moment they get back from the honeymoon.
And again the moment they hold their first child.
They landed you and got the ring. They got what they wanted. So the first change really isn't a change for them, but it's a change for you. It means you get sex when they get what they want from you. E.g. a fatter wallet, painted house, or treated for a few days like a revered goddess, their list is endless. After the second change, you're not the love of their life anymore, they don't like the way they look in the mirror, and nothing is ever good enough (kids deserve better than your best). Which means most of us married men get sex once a month or so if we're lucky and we work at it.
Glad you found a true sex addict! I hope she stays that way after kids.
And don't think I'm saying women are evil and mean to be this way. It's no more evil than us men developing very selective hearing over the years. We don't plan to become experts at tuning out the chatter and saying "uh-uh", "that's nice". We just do it naturally. Like a survival trait. Same thing.
In Digg We Trust?
I stream video and audio content to my PS3 via TVersity (and MediaTomb on a linux box) all the time.
WTF are you people watching? Seriously? When my day is over I crash on the couch late at night and I turn my TV to the On position and channel surf.
Last night Futurama: Bender's Game was on. Cool. When it's time to veg out on the couch and stare at the tube there's usually something to watch on regular old TV (cable, FIOS, DirecTV, whatever). If there's something really cool I need to find, there's DVDs. What's with all the extra boxes, streaming, transcoding, UPnP, etc. etc.? I wonder if it's not just an excuse to toy with Linux? Honestly, what kind of video is worth all that thought and effort? The greatest movies ever made are available from netflix or the redbox for a buck. And then there's always books. What's the reward for all that time and effort to watch video? What am I missing?
Unless he controls 51% of stupidfanclub it's just a reorg and a nice promotion.
The quote about protecting them because they feel pain almost dissolves their credibility for me when I read it. If Professor Bob Elwood and Mirjam Appel from the School of Biological Sciences at Queen's University, Belfast were working toward protections and regulations for crabs they'd be calling for sustainable harvest and healthy crab populations. They'd be talking to fishermen and doing see-bottom surveys. They'd be studying reproduction cycles and taking crab censuses.
Whether or not crabs feel and remember pain as we do is of interest to neurologists, behavioral scientists, etc.. The research is nifty enough on its own, for knowledge sake. There's no need to sound like a fruitarian over it. One might think Bob was just trying to make that "connection" between science and "the people" and didn't mean to come off sounding like a PETA zealot over what is essentially a giant bug. Either that, or somebody like PETA has some grant money...
I don't think its the safety technology or performance ability that's mostly to blame. It's the "comfortable drive".
At some point the ability to feel the road and get actual feedback from your car became "uncomfortable". My wife's 2005 V6 Camry was a perfect example. Full of power, features like "traction control", and great cornering, yet it felt like driving a hovercraft. No feedback whatsoever. And the throttle was slow to respond when you needed a quick leap into moving traffic. There was a very palpable "pause & glide". Meaning even the gear ratio was for "comfort". I would describe it as a wonderfully built car that was dumbed down terribly for people who don't like feeling like they're driving. It was a version of "comfort" that made me very uncomfortable.
Her new no-frills Matrix 4-banger is a car for drivers. You can feel exactly what you're doing in that car and it responds very quickly. Much more economical too.
I am not surprised at this turn of events because Dawkins' comments in the God delusion are widely considered to be hateful in nature. Consider that, in the United states, some 93-96 percent of people believe in God and some 40% of people believe in evolution. The intersection of these two is still significant, but the symmetric difference of these axioms is not. Dawkins holds that to be an intelligent scientific thinker you must hold to both strict naturalism and evolution apriori, which is not so subtly implying that all of the other 53-ish percent of humans living in the United states are basically drooling morons.
The truth hurts, news at 11.
>"public" and "on a website" are different things.
But your public salary is on display somewhere?
"But look, you found the notice didn't you?"
"Yes," said Arthur, "yes I did. It was on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying 'Beware of the Leopard'."
The whole problem with this law and the concept of "insurance" is that you have to continually prove your innocence or you are de facto Guilty. You could shoot a nude of a 40 year old women but if you don't have a record of her age then you're guilty of a crime.
I know we must all Think of Children all the time, but what if you had to continually register your possessions to prove you didn't steal them, or continually register your driving speed to prove you weren't speeding? We'd be all up in arms over the outrageous unconstitutionality of such laws. But point a camera at a naked body and all of the sudden it's ok to have laws just like Singapore or China.
> Never underestimate the stupidity of humanity when it comes to anything sex-related.
Indeed. Especially Americans.
> Things will grow in the spring - farmers will buy fertilizer...
Errr.. Thank you Chauncey Gardiner.
> You own the information you put on Facebook and you control what happens to it.
Oh of course you own it.
But the TOS grants them a comprehensive perpetual worldwide royalty free license to it.
So who has the most control of your information? They do, of course. "Sorry for the confusion." Ha.
> If you think the economy is bad now, what do you think it will be like when we hurt every business that deals with china?
It would really suck. Somebody has to provide us with cheap shit. Otherwise we'll have to start working hard for it ourselves.
Interesting. The question seems to be one of scale. What works for viruses doesn't work so well for what I describe?
I was thinking building and updating the database and question algorithms would be far easier than reverse engineering it. Thus the system stays ahead of the bad guys in the same way AV software does. Guess it ain't so.
It also amazes me the length and expense that spammers will go to for something that is 99.999 percent ineffective. There we are with scale again.
I was thinking brute force isn't feasible when every failure generates a new question.
But let me take another stab at it.
What if the question wasn't always "what is in the picture?"
Given a database of 1000 basic images like animals, shapes, fruits, and vegetables matched to the word for what each one is and it's catagory (animal, fruit, etc).. Now the CAPTCHA shows 6 of them in 6 little squares. (~985 quadrillion combinations) It can ask a nearly endless list of questions using simple formulae:
What is the third image?
How many animals are shown? Spell the number.
Type the first 2 letters of each fruit.
Type the shape names using no spaces.
Instead of always asking "what are the 5 digits" now we're asking for an almost arbitrary number of digits. And there are 6 picture images that have to be ID'd.
Did I beat the OCR problem w/o introducing any fatal new ones?
Ok so I read the article...
The article focuses on OCR as the main problem. CAPTCHA can be broken by OCR, so reCAPTCHA uses text that OCR has already had trouble reading. Ok got it.
So why are they stuck on ASCII characters? Why not use obfuscated animal pictures? "Type one word that best describes the picture above." Answer: Zebra (Moose, Dog, whatever)
Why do they keep putting the right answer in the CAPTCHA? How about obfuscating "__ cups in a pint?" or "A Bakers Dozen is __".
I'm no CMU whiz, but it seems to me that if the problem is OCR then stop putting the correct answer in ASCII characters right in the CAPTCHA.
It's not necessary to make them impossible to crack, it's only necessary to make it too economically infeasible for spammers to bother.
The difference is that we here in the USA (and we're not the only ones) have learned to live peacefully with our differences (for the most part). Most of us don't have the delusion that the world should be a homogeneous place and anyone that differs from us racially or religiously should be exiled or killed. You can find streets across our land where you'll see Jewish, Muslim, 67 flavors of Christian, atheist, Hindu, and Neo-Pagan folks in a rainbow of skin colors all doing business cheerfully with each other and chatting in line at the coffee shop. Sure there are issues. But at this point they're mostly "grown-up" issues. The "shitty holy land" is a shitty holy land because most of its inhabitants have not bothered to mature for the last 2000 years.
Right or wrong, this leaves many of us to believe that they are hopeless and should be treated as a blight upon humanity.
I'm sure we should be compassionate and feel sorry for them. Like a thoroughly sheltered and abused child who is thrust out of his/her commune into the wide modern world at age 18 with all kinds of issues and no coping skills. Except there are 2 of them from different communes and they've been assigned to the same dorm room. "Student Killing Spree! News at 11."
Maybe I'm beating this metaphor to death, but the Holy Land is very much like that. Telegraph, Radio, Television, the Internet, quick plane flights, global commerce, etc. etc... The last century has a been a rude awakening to a sheltered antiquated culture (you might say 2 sheltered antiquated cultures). It's not entirely their fault. It's wrong, but it's all too easy to suggest sterilizing the "infection" festering over there.
eSATA is great for external drives that stay connected and turned on. But for removable (i.e. flash) drives they can be a pain. Every time you pop a card in or out and then reboot the BIOS makes you redefine Boot Order, eSATA drives are just like regular SATA drives, not a "removable device".
As a photographer who unloads about 20-30GB of raw files every week from CF cards in multiple readers, I'm pretty excited about USB 3.0.
I did a "thorough skimming" of every link, and I see no mention of light pollution or dark sky lighting?
WTF?!?! Somebody please tell me I missed it.
That's thing with Chiropractic... it's 85% bunk because it claims by "aligning your spine" it can heal all sorts of things.
Straight snag from Wikipedia: [ emphasis mine]
Chiropractic... emphasizes diagnosis, treatment and prevention of mechanical disorders of the musculoskeletal system, especially the spine, under the hypothesis that these disorders affect general health via the nervous system.[1]... Chiropractic treatment focuses on manual therapy including spinal manipulation and other joint and soft tissue manipulation, and includes exercises and health and lifestyle counseling.[4] Traditionally, it assumes that a vertebral subluxation or spinal joint dysfunction can interfere with the body's function and its innate ability to heal itself. [5]
The bold stuff is the bunk. Complete garbage. But if they just said.. "Chiropractic.. we fix back problems." I think it would be a solid medical practice. Even evidence based. There is no doubt that electro-therapy applied to muscles relaxes spasms and reduces inflammation, that manipulating a sacroiliac joint for instance, back into alignment, definitely works.
I have recurring problems with my sacroiliac joints. I walk into a chiropractor so crooked and bent I look like I have severe scoliosis, with one leg longer than the other, in severe pain. I walk out straight and tall, with soreness instead of debilitating pain. Every time.
So yeah, mostly Chiropractic is bunk. But it can fix your back, "kinks" and spasms in your neck, a "thrown out" lower back, etc.
My anecdote isn't evidence. But a physical therapist will do the same thing: http://www.sportsinjuryclinic.net/cybertherapist/back/buttocks/sacroiliac.htm
They just charge a lot more and don't call it Chiropractic.