To add to the Lurker's statement, the reporters will only wind up getting more press releases that are sanctioned by the people who want to spread propaganda as "news". (Look up Fox News sometime for the American/Capitalist version of Pravda)
Oh god not again. Any time I hear the phrase "personal reponsibility" I want to punch people in the mouth. The fact is that people are lazy. This is not their fault. They were born that way. If they can find an easy way out, they'll take it. The key isn't to attempt force them to do something by taking away any systems that actively coerce them to do that thing. The key is to just let them live their lives with minimal effort at a guaranteed base quality of life. In other words, they shouldn't get rich off the system. But they shouldn't live in total poverty with otherwise avoidable health issues. I'm responsible for you. You're responsible for me. That's the way it works. Otherwise there's no reason for being. You have no purpose other than to take care of me and vice-versa. See?
The problem I've got with "personal reponsibility" is that the only thing you're doing is taking people who have little to offer (and therefore little to gain) and making them completely useless. If they're completely useless, they either die off or they take the path of least resistance (theft, getting incarcerated, etc...) to get as much as possible for as little effort required. I think it's better if you just give them something and let them go on their way until they die of natural causes.
In Case Your Browser Can't Render the Site...
on
How to Become Invisible
·
· Score: 2, Informative
...properly. Mine couldn't (Firefox 1.5 on Gentoo Linux). I got a bunch of screwed up CSS or something because there was text on top of text. Here's the story, what little there is of a story:
By Patricia Reaney
LONDON (Reuters) - It's unlikely to occur by swallowing a pill or donning a special cloak, but invisibility could be possible in the not too distant future, according to research published on Monday.
Harry Potter accomplished it with his magic cloak. H.G. Wells' Invisible Man swallowed a substance that made him transparent.
But Dr Ulf Leonhardt, a theoretical physicist at St Andrews University in Scotland, believes the most plausible example is the Invisible Woman, one of the Marvel Comics superheroes in the "Fantastic Four".
"She guides light around her using a force field in this cartoon. This is what could be done in practice," Leonhardt told Reuters in an interview. "That comes closest to what engineers will probably be able to do in the future."
Invisibility is an optical illusion that the object or person is not there. Leonhardt uses the example of water circling around a stone. The water flows in, swirls around the stone and then leaves as if nothing was there.
"If you replace the water with light then you would not see that there was something present because the light is guided around the person or object. You would see the light coming from the scenery behind as if there was nothing in front," he said.
In the research published in the New Journal of Physics, Leonhardt described the physics of theoretical devices that could create invisibility. It is a follow-up paper to an earlier study published in the journal Science.
"What the Invisible Woman does is curve space around herself to bend light. What these devices would do is to mimic that curved space," he said.
I'm thinking more in terms of minimizing casualties. There is no reason people need to die or suffer. Sure, it can happen, but preventing it (ie, trying to make it impossible) should be a major focus of planning a society.
The i586 DOES exist. Same as the i686. I don't care what Intel marketing pushed down people's throats, I still call them 586 and 686 systems. So does the Linux kernel...
Heresy!!!! Are you INSANE???? How can you say that the original Macintosh looked anything like the IBM PC. That's like saying that you can stick some makeup, a blonde wig and strap on hooters on a pig and it's Jenna Jameson!!! And I would say Apple had style down much earlier than the iMac when you consider just how beautiful the Mac II was for it's day. Sure, there are plenty of PCs today that just slightly make it past the door when compared to OLD Macs, but let's face it... Apple KNOWS style.
Back when I was in college I took both an environmental Biology class and an environmental Geography class. The term unsustainable lifestyle was used frequently in these classes to talk about the wasteful way that the western world lives. Much of what the classes indicated was that this view indicates that for the maximum carrying capacity of the Earth (how many people can be kept simultaneously alive and healthy at a given time) to be reasonable, we would all have to live in grass huts and eat rice. There aren't enough resources to go around and that is not a changeable fact. But these discussions were primarily limited to the domain of ecology.
It occurred to me the other day just how fragile our lifestyle is. Take, for example, the 2003 blackout mentioned in the blurb. That blackout lasted about two days where I lived and longer in some of the outlying suburbs. Just in those two days, I personally lost food in my fridge/freezer, got an XP (no SPs) laptop infected with a virus while trying to access the internet without my Linux firewall using a UPS to power the DSL modem, and had neighbors "wilding" in the nearby city neiborhoods since they didn't have to work the next day. On a larger scale, my neighborhood grocer lost a lot of their stock and prices went up to account for the loss (and oddly never went back down again), my employer lost a few Cisco routers due to unstable power when the power did come back online in spite of the UPS systems, and I'm certain there were people who had far more serious problems due to the blackout. Just two days and everything was starting to go to hell in hours.
Then I thought about this... for those of you who use less reliable OSes like Windows, do you remember how much of a pain it was to restore back to the EXACT state you were in before a hard drive crash? It's nearly impossible pre-Windows NT. You can get real close, but you're never back to exactly where you were before. Things that you've built up over time and come to rely on but also taken for granted are gone or don't work right. Or if they were downloads, then you might wind up having to use a newer version that loses functionality compared to the older one which you no longer have. Now apply that to a city. A state. An entire country. The way our societies are built are unsustainable. We are on very shaky ground and there is damn little we can do about it.
Also consider the "little things" that aren't so little when they regard you personally. Take breast implants. They require periodic checkups to make sure everything is going just right (ie. you're not about to be killed or made deathly ill byt them). If you happen to be coming up on a checkup and the hospitals are full of bomb blast victims, do you think anyone is going to see you anytime soon to check them out? Not likely. At least not until it's life threatening. That's no way to live.
I propose that people should try to find ways to live that can be easily carried on after most disasters (barring complete catastrophies or nuclear holocusts). For example, hydroponic gardens that are operated by wind up mechanisms with cisterns to collect rain water for the irrigation of the gardens. Or, alternative modes of mass transportation that don't rely on centralized power sources or centrally distributed fuels. Pretty much all of these systems should be self contained and rely on nature. Solar, wind, hydro, bio power sources are all essential.
At the very least, know how to get yourself out of a sticky situation using bleach, aluminum foil, paper towels or napkins, baking soda, a simple container and lots of copper wire... Those of you who know what I'm talking about will smile.
Oh my god! You are SOOOOO blind. Microsoft FORCED competition? What? What the hell are you smoking? Microsoft is opposed to any competition that is detrimental to their cash flow. The fact that they "forced" competition by making hardware vendors support their OSes is not a good thing. Next you're going to tell me they are innovative too! Hah, wrong again fatboy!
1. Apple is not interested in profit or marketshare when compared to having a beautiful looking machine that just works. That's the primary consideration as it should be. In other words, do what you love and the money will follow. 2. Apple users are superior to Windows / Intel users (Even when the Apple user boots with bootcamp to XP?). You've got it wrong. When Windows runs in bootcamp, it runs in an environment that protects the users from becoming funkified by the obscenely ugly OS. Of course bootcamp also warns the user that they are now fucking without a condom... errr... surfing without protection. 3. Windows / Intel users are slobs (I suppose bootcamp users are slobs with style). Only partially right. All Windows users are slobs. They eat at McDonalds, shop at Walmart and believe in the Republican party. See the above comment for why Mac users are protected from the Windows filth when they run Bootcamp. 4. Apple systems are "lovingly crafted" (I can feel the love). I see you point to Wired. Wired used to be a decent publication... for about five minutes. Then they got coopted by weirdos with ideas about "personal freedom", gadget guys who just buy gadgets with absolutely no understanding of the circuit design and basically geek wannabes, which is super lame since NO ONE WANTS to be a geek. 5. Apple knows their users and respects them (They know their users are dirty pirates, so they lovingly protect them with DRM) Let me know if I'm off... Yes. Once again you are completely off. The DRM is there because Apple users in general are upstanding citizens who break no laws. They realize that the DRM won't affect them since they do nothing illegal (unlike PC users who do all kinds of illegal things). So in the end DRM doesn't matter and Apple implements it with more style than Microsoft does anyway, so you know when DRM DOES come up, it's going to look damn smooth.
Thank god I've got an inner Steve Jobs and not an inner Bill Gates.
Sure... for Joe Average and his less-than-average-looking wife maybe. But for anyone with a brain a Mac was the logical answer since it trumped a DOS box in every way. If you know what you're doing, migrating the data between the systems is a cakewalk. I have files that have traversed many OSes that date back to 1985. It's easy as long as you're not a moron.
If you know what you're doing it's easy to fix any OS problem. I can work on Mac, Windows, and various flavours of *nix and solve any problem. With that said, I'd have to say any "techie" that struggles with a Mac is a moron. I've taken them apart and put them back together quickly. Installing the OS an restoring data is a snap. Windows makes things a lot harder when it comes to getting your original environment back. *nix is SUPER easy to restore to the identical state. The point being that NO "techie" should have problems working on a Mac. Ever.
Bah... my link didn't work in the previous post. See here for information on L Computers. It also appears they are back in business. Tell me that shiny does't win every time...
Marketshare means nothing if you're not interested in profit. The fact is that Mac users love their machines with a passion that you will never see on the Windows side. Mac users are satisfied with what Apple has provided them with at every turn. And that is because Apple knows its users and respects them. Unlike Microsoft and the OEM vendors. To them, you're just another sale. You get what you get and you just sit there and suck it if it's not to your liking. With Apple, they pay attention to the sense of style their users are embued with by their superiority to Wintel slobs. Apple caters to their users and provides them with lovingly crafted systems that the Wintel world is just incapable of ever attainting. Witness the L-computers (Liebermann Computers) joke of a few years back. There were so many people in the Windows world who wanted a beautiful machines that were works of art and objects of desire. That it turned out to be untrue is a testament to the fact that Wintel users will NEVER "get it". Face it, Apple gets it and Microsoft doesn't. This will never change as long as the focus is on stupid things like marketshare and dollars. Customers matter. Apple knows that.
...after 20+ years Microsoft finally "gets it" or at least half of "it"? Oooh shiny wins with consumers every time. Apple knew this when they made the first Macs. But Apple also knew the other half of the equation that MS is still not getting: "just works".
While I agree that all the PC garbage is annoying, it's also neccessary. Mostly to keep less ethical people from unjustly abusing others. I don't believe in the idea of standing up and fighting for yourself if it's not something you are able or willing to do. The assumption that most people opposed to PC crap make is that everyone is capable or willing to stand up for themselves. That is flawed assumption. My take on it is that I am just as responsible for your well-being as you are for mine. If I see someone who is in a less advantaged situation than myself and needs help or support, I offer it. This is what everyone should do as a matter of course. Sadly, most people will not do this by nature. That is the major failing in the human animal. It's called "having a sense of civic duty". Contrast that to the "personal responsibility" that the idiot libertarians preach and you'll see why we are soon to be at each other's throats.
Actually yes. They ARE forced to eat there because they can't afford to buy decent food to begin with. So even if McDonalds isn't directly forcing them, the system that supports McDonalds, all the research they put into addicting people to their food and the economy that is being run by the people who asupport McDonalds... well yes they ARE being forced. Show me someone who works a minimum wage job who can buy decent food, put a roof over their heads and take care of a family. It's a HUGE problem and it has nothing to do with that "personal responsibility" bullshit that people like to spout off about. Sometimes life just sucks and you can't change it. Why is it that all the personal responsibility dorks are always rich white boys who never did a thing to get where they are today? I worked my ass off to get to where I am so don't preach any personal responsibility shit to me assholes.
Because of cultural bias. They don't eat McDonalds in other countries simply because they think the food is crap. We don't have that here because McDonalds IS the culture.
This is a point that a lot of people will miss. Most of us interested in this sort of set up will likely have one server that serves the storage out using a combination of LVM and RAID. This brings all the storage adiministration to one local machine instead of leaving it up to the systems that are attaching. The second point that is brought up in the post I'm responding to has to do with virtual machines. I'm using Xen (as it outperforms everything else) and it would certainly be able to handle the volumes handed out to Domain0 for support within Domain1, Domain2, etc... This means that you don't need any extra hardware to pull off booting from an AoE box. Just virtualize everything. It's a beautiful idea. I've been exploring GNBD (Global Network Block Devices) myself for this but AoE seems to be a bit more interesting.
I believe when they say "server", they mean the server that is hosting the drives and serving them to the network. So that DOES centralize all the management. You just serve out the logical volumes using AoE and you're all set.
Think what you want. The levels of obesity here in the U.S. indicate that something has changed and it is something that has little to do with will power or self control.
Slashdot Mirror
To add to the Lurker's statement, the reporters will only wind up getting more press releases that are sanctioned by the people who want to spread propaganda as "news". (Look up Fox News sometime for the American/Capitalist version of Pravda)
Oh god not again. Any time I hear the phrase "personal reponsibility" I want to punch people in the mouth. The fact is that people are lazy. This is not their fault. They were born that way. If they can find an easy way out, they'll take it. The key isn't to attempt force them to do something by taking away any systems that actively coerce them to do that thing. The key is to just let them live their lives with minimal effort at a guaranteed base quality of life. In other words, they shouldn't get rich off the system. But they shouldn't live in total poverty with otherwise avoidable health issues. I'm responsible for you. You're responsible for me. That's the way it works. Otherwise there's no reason for being. You have no purpose other than to take care of me and vice-versa. See?
The problem I've got with "personal reponsibility" is that the only thing you're doing is taking people who have little to offer (and therefore little to gain) and making them completely useless. If they're completely useless, they either die off or they take the path of least resistance (theft, getting incarcerated, etc...) to get as much as possible for as little effort required. I think it's better if you just give them something and let them go on their way until they die of natural causes.
By Patricia Reaney
LONDON (Reuters) - It's unlikely to occur by swallowing a pill or donning a special cloak, but invisibility could be possible in the not too distant future, according to research published on Monday.
Harry Potter accomplished it with his magic cloak. H.G. Wells' Invisible Man swallowed a substance that made him transparent.
But Dr Ulf Leonhardt, a theoretical physicist at St Andrews University in Scotland, believes the most plausible example is the Invisible Woman, one of the Marvel Comics superheroes in the "Fantastic Four".
"She guides light around her using a force field in this cartoon. This is what could be done in practice," Leonhardt told Reuters in an interview. "That comes closest to what engineers will probably be able to do in the future."
Invisibility is an optical illusion that the object or person is not there. Leonhardt uses the example of water circling around a stone. The water flows in, swirls around the stone and then leaves as if nothing was there.
"If you replace the water with light then you would not see that there was something present because the light is guided around the person or object. You would see the light coming from the scenery behind as if there was nothing in front," he said.
In the research published in the New Journal of Physics, Leonhardt described the physics of theoretical devices that could create invisibility. It is a follow-up paper to an earlier study published in the journal Science.
"What the Invisible Woman does is curve space around herself to bend light. What these devices would do is to mimic that curved space," he said.
I'm thinking more in terms of minimizing casualties. There is no reason people need to die or suffer. Sure, it can happen, but preventing it (ie, trying to make it impossible) should be a major focus of planning a society.
The i586 DOES exist. Same as the i686. I don't care what Intel marketing pushed down people's throats, I still call them 586 and 686 systems. So does the Linux kernel...
Don't blame me, I didn't vote for Bush. Oh wait... wrong thread. It's not my fault you use Windows. Go get a REAL OS next time.
Heresy!!!! Are you INSANE???? How can you say that the original Macintosh looked anything like the IBM PC. That's like saying that you can stick some makeup, a blonde wig and strap on hooters on a pig and it's Jenna Jameson!!! And I would say Apple had style down much earlier than the iMac when you consider just how beautiful the Mac II was for it's day. Sure, there are plenty of PCs today that just slightly make it past the door when compared to OLD Macs, but let's face it... Apple KNOWS style.
Back when I was in college I took both an environmental Biology class and an environmental Geography class. The term unsustainable lifestyle was used frequently in these classes to talk about the wasteful way that the western world lives. Much of what the classes indicated was that this view indicates that for the maximum carrying capacity of the Earth (how many people can be kept simultaneously alive and healthy at a given time) to be reasonable, we would all have to live in grass huts and eat rice. There aren't enough resources to go around and that is not a changeable fact. But these discussions were primarily limited to the domain of ecology.
It occurred to me the other day just how fragile our lifestyle is. Take, for example, the 2003 blackout mentioned in the blurb. That blackout lasted about two days where I lived and longer in some of the outlying suburbs. Just in those two days, I personally lost food in my fridge/freezer, got an XP (no SPs) laptop infected with a virus while trying to access the internet without my Linux firewall using a UPS to power the DSL modem, and had neighbors "wilding" in the nearby city neiborhoods since they didn't have to work the next day. On a larger scale, my neighborhood grocer lost a lot of their stock and prices went up to account for the loss (and oddly never went back down again), my employer lost a few Cisco routers due to unstable power when the power did come back online in spite of the UPS systems, and I'm certain there were people who had far more serious problems due to the blackout. Just two days and everything was starting to go to hell in hours.
Then I thought about this... for those of you who use less reliable OSes like Windows, do you remember how much of a pain it was to restore back to the EXACT state you were in before a hard drive crash? It's nearly impossible pre-Windows NT. You can get real close, but you're never back to exactly where you were before. Things that you've built up over time and come to rely on but also taken for granted are gone or don't work right. Or if they were downloads, then you might wind up having to use a newer version that loses functionality compared to the older one which you no longer have. Now apply that to a city. A state. An entire country. The way our societies are built are unsustainable. We are on very shaky ground and there is damn little we can do about it.
Also consider the "little things" that aren't so little when they regard you personally. Take breast implants. They require periodic checkups to make sure everything is going just right (ie. you're not about to be killed or made deathly ill byt them). If you happen to be coming up on a checkup and the hospitals are full of bomb blast victims, do you think anyone is going to see you anytime soon to check them out? Not likely. At least not until it's life threatening. That's no way to live.
I propose that people should try to find ways to live that can be easily carried on after most disasters (barring complete catastrophies or nuclear holocusts). For example, hydroponic gardens that are operated by wind up mechanisms with cisterns to collect rain water for the irrigation of the gardens. Or, alternative modes of mass transportation that don't rely on centralized power sources or centrally distributed fuels. Pretty much all of these systems should be self contained and rely on nature. Solar, wind, hydro, bio power sources are all essential.
At the very least, know how to get yourself out of a sticky situation using bleach, aluminum foil, paper towels or napkins, baking soda, a simple container and lots of copper wire... Those of you who know what I'm talking about will smile.
Oh my god! You are SOOOOO blind. Microsoft FORCED competition? What? What the hell are you smoking? Microsoft is opposed to any competition that is detrimental to their cash flow. The fact that they "forced" competition by making hardware vendors support their OSes is not a good thing. Next you're going to tell me they are innovative too! Hah, wrong again fatboy!
You're completely off. Here is the reality:
1. Apple is not interested in profit or marketshare when compared to having a beautiful looking machine that just works. That's the primary consideration as it should be. In other words, do what you love and the money will follow.
2. Apple users are superior to Windows / Intel users (Even when the Apple user boots with bootcamp to XP?). You've got it wrong. When Windows runs in bootcamp, it runs in an environment that protects the users from becoming funkified by the obscenely ugly OS. Of course bootcamp also warns the user that they are now fucking without a condom... errr... surfing without protection.
3. Windows / Intel users are slobs (I suppose bootcamp users are slobs with style). Only partially right. All Windows users are slobs. They eat at McDonalds, shop at Walmart and believe in the Republican party. See the above comment for why Mac users are protected from the Windows filth when they run Bootcamp.
4. Apple systems are "lovingly crafted" (I can feel the love). I see you point to Wired. Wired used to be a decent publication... for about five minutes. Then they got coopted by weirdos with ideas about "personal freedom", gadget guys who just buy gadgets with absolutely no understanding of the circuit design and basically geek wannabes, which is super lame since NO ONE WANTS to be a geek.
5. Apple knows their users and respects them (They know their users are dirty pirates, so they lovingly protect them with DRM) Let me know if I'm off... Yes. Once again you are completely off. The DRM is there because Apple users in general are upstanding citizens who break no laws. They realize that the DRM won't affect them since they do nothing illegal (unlike PC users who do all kinds of illegal things). So in the end DRM doesn't matter and Apple implements it with more style than Microsoft does anyway, so you know when DRM DOES come up, it's going to look damn smooth.
Thank god I've got an inner Steve Jobs and not an inner Bill Gates.
Joe Sixpack has no place in this discussion. Joe Sixpack doesn't even have any business using a cellphone, let alone a holy computer like a Mac.
Sure... for Joe Average and his less-than-average-looking wife maybe. But for anyone with a brain a Mac was the logical answer since it trumped a DOS box in every way. If you know what you're doing, migrating the data between the systems is a cakewalk. I have files that have traversed many OSes that date back to 1985. It's easy as long as you're not a moron.
If you know what you're doing it's easy to fix any OS problem. I can work on Mac, Windows, and various flavours of *nix and solve any problem. With that said, I'd have to say any "techie" that struggles with a Mac is a moron. I've taken them apart and put them back together quickly. Installing the OS an restoring data is a snap. Windows makes things a lot harder when it comes to getting your original environment back. *nix is SUPER easy to restore to the identical state. The point being that NO "techie" should have problems working on a Mac. Ever.
Bah... my link didn't work in the previous post. See here for information on L Computers. It also appears they are back in business. Tell me that shiny does't win every time...
Marketshare means nothing if you're not interested in profit. The fact is that Mac users love their machines with a passion that you will never see on the Windows side. Mac users are satisfied with what Apple has provided them with at every turn. And that is because Apple knows its users and respects them. Unlike Microsoft and the OEM vendors. To them, you're just another sale. You get what you get and you just sit there and suck it if it's not to your liking. With Apple, they pay attention to the sense of style their users are embued with by their superiority to Wintel slobs. Apple caters to their users and provides them with lovingly crafted systems that the Wintel world is just incapable of ever attainting. Witness the L-computers (Liebermann Computers) joke of a few years back. There were so many people in the Windows world who wanted a beautiful machines that were works of art and objects of desire. That it turned out to be untrue is a testament to the fact that Wintel users will NEVER "get it". Face it, Apple gets it and Microsoft doesn't. This will never change as long as the focus is on stupid things like marketshare and dollars. Customers matter. Apple knows that.
...after 20+ years Microsoft finally "gets it" or at least half of "it"? Oooh shiny wins with consumers every time. Apple knew this when they made the first Macs. But Apple also knew the other half of the equation that MS is still not getting: "just works".
Nice. I can't say I disagree with what you said really. It's a nice overall summary of why humans suck in general.
While I agree that all the PC garbage is annoying, it's also neccessary. Mostly to keep less ethical people from unjustly abusing others. I don't believe in the idea of standing up and fighting for yourself if it's not something you are able or willing to do. The assumption that most people opposed to PC crap make is that everyone is capable or willing to stand up for themselves. That is flawed assumption. My take on it is that I am just as responsible for your well-being as you are for mine. If I see someone who is in a less advantaged situation than myself and needs help or support, I offer it. This is what everyone should do as a matter of course. Sadly, most people will not do this by nature. That is the major failing in the human animal. It's called "having a sense of civic duty". Contrast that to the "personal responsibility" that the idiot libertarians preach and you'll see why we are soon to be at each other's throats.
Eh? Whatever junior. When you start using Just for Men, call me and maybe we'll talk.
Actually yes. They ARE forced to eat there because they can't afford to buy decent food to begin with. So even if McDonalds isn't directly forcing them, the system that supports McDonalds, all the research they put into addicting people to their food and the economy that is being run by the people who asupport McDonalds... well yes they ARE being forced. Show me someone who works a minimum wage job who can buy decent food, put a roof over their heads and take care of a family. It's a HUGE problem and it has nothing to do with that "personal responsibility" bullshit that people like to spout off about. Sometimes life just sucks and you can't change it. Why is it that all the personal responsibility dorks are always rich white boys who never did a thing to get where they are today? I worked my ass off to get to where I am so don't preach any personal responsibility shit to me assholes.
Because of cultural bias. They don't eat McDonalds in other countries simply because they think the food is crap. We don't have that here because McDonalds IS the culture.
Hey... I hold the guys who posted hot gritz, natalie portman and goatse trolls in high regard. I was/am still among them. ;P You KNOW you liked it.
This is a point that a lot of people will miss. Most of us interested in this sort of set up will likely have one server that serves the storage out using a combination of LVM and RAID. This brings all the storage adiministration to one local machine instead of leaving it up to the systems that are attaching. The second point that is brought up in the post I'm responding to has to do with virtual machines. I'm using Xen (as it outperforms everything else) and it would certainly be able to handle the volumes handed out to Domain0 for support within Domain1, Domain2, etc... This means that you don't need any extra hardware to pull off booting from an AoE box. Just virtualize everything. It's a beautiful idea. I've been exploring GNBD (Global Network Block Devices) myself for this but AoE seems to be a bit more interesting.
I believe when they say "server", they mean the server that is hosting the drives and serving them to the network. So that DOES centralize all the management. You just serve out the logical volumes using AoE and you're all set.
Think what you want. The levels of obesity here in the U.S. indicate that something has changed and it is something that has little to do with will power or self control.