Wow, look at all these fucking useless posts. Did anybody bother to read the article? Look, it's really short. Just read it for once.
Firstly, this DoubleClick exec is female, not male. Secondly, she helped clean up DoubleClick. She ran the division responsible for appeasing the privacy advocates/watchdogs/etc.
I agree, and take it one step further. How about a virus that kills everyone at a certain time. Give it a few months to spread and then let it go off all at once.
We wouldn't be able to engineer a solution unless we discovered it before it went off.
Given the amazing number of exploits in software produced today that go undetected for years before some hacker exploits them with a worm, I don't even want to think about it. (There's a good analogy of OSS and CSS vs scientific self-censorship and knowledge sharing here though.)
I'm no luddite, but the minute that any reasonably funded person can engineer something like this is possible, we're fucked. It's that simple.
Unless, of course, we engineer ourselves to be completely moral (and lose a bit of our free will along with it). Maybe not completely moral, but perhaps opposed to murder of any kind.
I always defined "geek" as someone that is obsessive about something. It has nothing to do with how you dress or if you wear thick glasses - that defines nerdiness. Geekyness is something else entirely.
We have sports geeks, car geeks, and of course, computer and gaming geeks.
Anyone that plays Everquest for 50 hours per week is a hardcore EQ geek by my definition.
I'm a hardcore gamer (I spend a few hundred CAD$ every month on games) but even I don't spend 50 hours per week on games. As far as I am concerned, this study just reinforced stereotypes I held about online games.
(For the record, I used to play DAoC. It was fun, but far to repetitive and completely lacking in challenge)
You don't get points that way (scoring with chicks aside). DDR is fun for the challenge. I play it a lot (at home, of course, away from all the cruel teenagers:)
Oops, I wanted to preview. Anyhow, continuing my point, my fiance is not like me at all. She eats a "treat" every day (some cookies or candy or whatever). She used to weight 170 pounds and is now a healthy 135.
Oh, and she eats tons of carbs (hardly any meat or fat, no red meat at all) so I guess if all we do is listen to anecdotes I guess Atkins is all wrong.:] She basically eats enough protein to keep her muscles from wasting away.
Here's what I do: I give myself a day to let loose a bit. I eat around 1500 cal per day, except on saturdays, where I eat whatever I want (up to 3500 calories, usually).
Keeps me from binging after a month of denial.
Nobody wants to live without chocolate, me least of all.
Mostly, though, you just have to experiment and be patient. It took me quite awhile to find what worked for me.
Basically, I just zeroed in on accepted truths (ie/ 3500 food kilocalories = 1 pound of fat, exercise is good, eating less than 1200 calories per day is unhealthy, water is good, etc) and tailored my own plan.
Honestly, what the hell are you talking about? I eat tons of rice and I have lost fat steadily for the last year! (I'm a Canadian euro-mutt, btw, not asian)
It's, for the most part, all about the calories guys. Yes, the GI might influence your hunger a bit, going into ketosis may increase fat burning by some percentage (and accidently going into keto-acidosis will kill you), but every fad diet that works, in the end, comes down to low caloric input.
Atkins, Body for Life, Body Opus, the Zone, etc, etc - all low cal!
BMI is ok for average (non-athletic) people, but it's much more useful as a statistical analysis tool.
Bodyfat is a good indicator, but hard to measure at home accurately. I personally just measure my waist and estimate my bodyfat.
Not to be mean, but at your weight, I hope you can bench 350. I have a friend that just weighs a lot (very dense body, it's wierd, it's not all muscle or fat) and he's only like 180 at 5'11".
That's more true for people that have lifted for a long time. Most people that are just starting out can indeed gain muscle and lose fat... for awhile. You won't gain a lot of muscle this way though.
Most people overestimate how much a few extra pounds will burn. I have gained quite a few pounds of muscle and my caloric needs haven't changed much. If I had gained 20 pounds of muscle, that may be different though.
I use my DVD player to play MP3 cd's myself. Since I never watch TV, I was never really interested in getting a Tivo. And since I have a portable MP3 player that plays CD's, I can use the CD's on the road too.
I think the ideal situation would be people working less for the same amount of pay since machines are picking up slack. That doesn't seem to happen though.
In any case, I have often heard that modern technology has just increased the demand on people. I'm designing systems that do more than systems of old in far less time, for example (at least, according to the more senior developers where I work:).
Can't have it both ways, really. I'm guessing you live in the city, where it's easy to find work and lots of things to do. But if you really feel the way you do, why not move somewhere more remote? (Not flamebait, it's a serious question)
Doesn't the side of a Linux Box state the Minimum IQ requirements alongside the CPU and memory requirements?
IQ != computing ability. IQ is a loose definition of how strong your problem solving skills are. A high IQ is useful in any field, but I know plenty of average guys that are Linux gods.
she essentially tried installing it on some crap hardware without having an either net access to search the newsgroups for solutions or having the geek that gave her the distros on hand.
That was the whole point of the experience. Most of the time, that type of situation would work with Windows (though not always, I've had problems with Windows 2000 and certain hardware).
Another thing I would note is that the best technical writers are essentilly retarded monkeys. Nothing personal, but the best tech writers and testers are retarded monkeys.
You mispelled essentially. I bet a technical writer would have caught that before hitting "submit."
Slashdot Mirror
Wow, look at all these fucking useless posts. Did anybody bother to read the article? Look, it's really short. Just read it for once.
Firstly, this DoubleClick exec is female, not male. Secondly, she helped clean up DoubleClick. She ran the division responsible for appeasing the privacy advocates/watchdogs/etc.
but today, words escape me. That's just wrong, somehow...
:)
(This coming from a Lords of Acid fan
I agree, and take it one step further. How about a virus that kills everyone at a certain time. Give it a few months to spread and then let it go off all at once.
We wouldn't be able to engineer a solution unless we discovered it before it went off.
Given the amazing number of exploits in software produced today that go undetected for years before some hacker exploits them with a worm, I don't even want to think about it. (There's a good analogy of OSS and CSS vs scientific self-censorship and knowledge sharing here though.)
I'm no luddite, but the minute that any reasonably funded person can engineer something like this is possible, we're fucked. It's that simple.
Unless, of course, we engineer ourselves to be completely moral (and lose a bit of our free will along with it). Maybe not completely moral, but perhaps opposed to murder of any kind.
I bet the coach would freak out if he heard them talking about "buffing" each other though...
I always defined "geek" as someone that is obsessive about something. It has nothing to do with how you dress or if you wear thick glasses - that defines nerdiness. Geekyness is something else entirely.
We have sports geeks, car geeks, and of course, computer and gaming geeks.
Anyone that plays Everquest for 50 hours per week is a hardcore EQ geek by my definition.
I'm a hardcore gamer (I spend a few hundred CAD$ every month on games) but even I don't spend 50 hours per week on games. As far as I am concerned, this study just reinforced stereotypes I held about online games.
(For the record, I used to play DAoC. It was fun, but far to repetitive and completely lacking in challenge)
You don't get points that way (scoring with chicks aside). DDR is fun for the challenge. I play it a lot (at home, of course, away from all the cruel teenagers :)
Oops, I wanted to preview. Anyhow, continuing my point, my fiance is not like me at all. She eats a "treat" every day (some cookies or candy or whatever). She used to weight 170 pounds and is now a healthy 135.
:]
Oh, and she eats tons of carbs (hardly any meat or fat, no red meat at all) so I guess if all we do is listen to anecdotes I guess Atkins is all wrong.
She basically eats enough protein to keep her muscles from wasting away.
Here's what I do: I give myself a day to let loose a bit. I eat around 1500 cal per day, except on saturdays, where I eat whatever I want (up to 3500 calories, usually).
Keeps me from binging after a month of denial.
Nobody wants to live without chocolate, me least of all.
Mostly, though, you just have to experiment and be patient. It took me quite awhile to find what worked for me.
Basically, I just zeroed in on accepted truths (ie/ 3500 food kilocalories = 1 pound of fat, exercise is good, eating less than 1200 calories per day is unhealthy, water is good, etc) and tailored my own plan.
Dude, the chinese are getting fat because they are eating fries and burgers just like us.
Honestly, what the hell are you talking about? I eat tons of rice and I have lost fat steadily for the last year! (I'm a Canadian euro-mutt, btw, not asian)
It's, for the most part, all about the calories guys. Yes, the GI might influence your hunger a bit, going into ketosis may increase fat burning by some percentage (and accidently going into keto-acidosis will kill you), but every fad diet that works, in the end, comes down to low caloric input.
Atkins, Body for Life, Body Opus, the Zone, etc, etc - all low cal!
BMI is ok for average (non-athletic) people, but it's much more useful as a statistical analysis tool.
Bodyfat is a good indicator, but hard to measure at home accurately. I personally just measure my waist and estimate my bodyfat.
Not to be mean, but at your weight, I hope you can bench 350. I have a friend that just weighs a lot (very dense body, it's wierd, it's not all muscle or fat) and he's only like 180 at 5'11".
That's more true for people that have lifted for a long time. Most people that are just starting out can indeed gain muscle and lose fat... for awhile. You won't gain a lot of muscle this way though.
Most people overestimate how much a few extra pounds will burn. I have gained quite a few pounds of muscle and my caloric needs haven't changed much. If I had gained 20 pounds of muscle, that may be different though.
I agree, although some competetive weight lifters eat upwards to that amount every day just to maintain muscle mass :)
Heheh, PA is pretty close to on-topic too.
Similar things have happened to me...
At least Microsoft is on a schedule. I never know when to expect a critical security patch for [favourite Linux distro name here]!
Do you use your Java skills for good, or for awesome?
Wait, does that make Windows CE some kind of frankenstein monster? You know, made from corpses and given life anew?
I'm a Canadian living in Canada.
Whenever a...
Hey, donuts!
Agreed. A better question would be if you can still buy mid-range models that last a long time.
:P
So can you? I have no idea, I have a Canon S200 that I never even use
I use my DVD player to play MP3 cd's myself. Since I never watch TV, I was never really interested in getting a Tivo. And since I have a portable MP3 player that plays CD's, I can use the CD's on the road too.
I read your post twice. I read it out loud in a serious voice and then in a sarcastic voice. They both made perfect sense.
:)
And people wonder why we use emoticons?
I think the ideal situation would be people working less for the same amount of pay since machines are picking up slack. That doesn't seem to happen though.
:).
In any case, I have often heard that modern technology has just increased the demand on people. I'm designing systems that do more than systems of old in far less time, for example (at least, according to the more senior developers where I work
Can't have it both ways, really. I'm guessing you live in the city, where it's easy to find work and lots of things to do. But if you really feel the way you do, why not move somewhere more remote? (Not flamebait, it's a serious question)
Three mile island is the result of operator incompetence, not bad science.
The point of the article is to upgrade from Windows to Linux. Common starting point for all distributions.
How else would you be able to see if, for example, a certain Linux distro bombs when reformatting the FAT32 to EXT3?
IQ != computing ability. IQ is a loose definition of how strong your problem solving skills are. A high IQ is useful in any field, but I know plenty of average guys that are Linux gods.
That was the whole point of the experience. Most of the time, that type of situation would work with Windows (though not always, I've had problems with Windows 2000 and certain hardware).
You mispelled essentially. I bet a technical writer would have caught that before hitting "submit."