Yes 33,000. The average person is only supposed to eat about 2000 calories. Based on your stature, you probably are eating less than 2000 calories. Personally, I'm not perfect, and nobody else is either. I eat about 2500 calories a day as far as I can figure, but I'm pretty active, so maybe that offsets it. In case anybody is wondering, I'm 5'8" and 160 lbs. Just checked my BMI and I'm at 24.3. That's on the border of overweight. And I consider myself quite skinny. I think the BMI is pretty seriously flawed, and doesn't account for anybody with any significant amount of muscle. I often wonder how much of these studies are offset by the fact that the BMI is such a bad metric for gaging overweightness.
Yes, there are some rare cases. However, the majority of fat people are not fat because of a thyroid problem. Using rare cases as a counterexample is not a very good argument. Almost 1/3 of the people in the US are obese. That's disgusting. Thyroid problems do not account for that high of a percentage of people being overweight.
I don't think they are handing out excuses. What they are saying is that people who hang out with lazy people don't exercise and don't eat well often don't exercise and don't eat well themselves. I imagine the same would also apply. If you hang out with people who eat vegan food and play soccer all day, then by doing what they do, you will probably stay pretty slim and in shape. Nobody is saying that you can't hang out with the fatties and remain skinny, or that you can't hang out with the vegan soccer players and gain weight, but that the people you hang out with can effect whether or not you are healthy. I also think it's kind of stupid that scientist try to find reasons or correlating actions to being overweight. We've figured this out a long time ago. Eat less (in terms of calories, not volume/weight of food), and exercise more and you will lose weight. Do the opposite, and you will gain weight. Very simple.
We have one guy at work who eats lunch at Wendy's every day. Not salad Wendy's, but frosty (milkshake), burger, and fries Wendy's. One day he grabbed a cinnamon roll at the connected Tim Hortons and talked about how he had a low carb lunch. He's not really that big, a bit overweight, possibly borderline obese according to BMI standards, but it's just so odd to listen to him talk about how he's trying to eat healthier, and then watch him go to Wendy's everyday.
I saw a show on discover/tlc/whatever the other day, about some severly overweight people. One guy ate 33000 Calories a day (actually, 33,000,000 calories, or 33,000 kilocalories if you want to be scientific). I thought about it, and that guy eats more in a day then I do in a week. Significantly more. They showed one of his meals, and it covered like an entire bed. Just the sausage course was like 6 sausages. there must have been at least 10 other plates there. All covered with greasy or sugar food. It was truly disgusting, and you wonder what the people bringing him the food (because he could no longer walk) were thinking.
Yes and no. On one hand, I remember hearing that babies have the potential to lean any language. Take a Chinese orphan, and bring them to America, and they will learn English no problem, with no accent. All babies have the potential to learn any language (or many languages). On the other hand, my laugh sounds exactly like my dad's. Not surprising until you find that I didn't live with my dad and didn't really spend much time with him at all. Many of our mannerisms are also the same. Like the way we walk, with a one hand in my pocket. The resemblence between our personalities is uncanny considering we didn't live together. So I have to ask, how much is based on what we see, and how much is based on our genes. The old nature vs. nurture question.
You may not personally see anything wrong with it. Some people don't personally see anything wrong with murdering someone. That doesn't mean it isn't against the law. That's the point the GP was trying to make. They should really outline that downloading ROMs may be or probably is illegal, and that you should consider this before embarking on this project.
If the punchscan system doesn't allow me show other people who I voted for, then how does it allow me to show myself who I voted for? Sure their scanned in copy looks the same as mine. Now, prove to me that showing me a scanned document proves that it was actually tallied correct (ie. the computer read the ballot as I would have), and that the same information was sent to the database.
I'm still trying to wrap my head around all this and fully understand how the punchscan system really works. And I have a University degree in software engineering. How do we expect the citizens with maybe only a highschool or lesser education to understand the system. Maybe the system is perfect (except that they can figure out who voted for who), but personally, I don't see why they need to make it such a complicated process that the average voter can't understand the details of how it works. I can understand every aspect of how pure paper voting works, and so can everyone else. I've gone through the punchscan site and all the demostrations of counting and auditing. I still don't really understand it fully. I understand the process, but I don't really understand how it makes voting any more secure.
So if all I can verify is that I voted for A, A, D, and C, then how can I actually verify that my vote was counted correctly. I'm not sure of all the details of the system, but it seems to me like it would be possible to show someone a scanned image of their sheet showing A, A, D, C while recording something completely different in the database. Also, am I the only one who thinks that understanding the voting process shouldn't require a PHD in computer science? I like the pen-and-paper-human-counted system because I completely understand how it works. With electronic voting machines, there's some organization saying, trust us, it works, don't worry about how it works, it just works. Diebold says the same thing about their systems, why should I believe one organization over another? What's wrong with a system that's simple enough for everyone to understand.
We do it in Canada, and since counting ballots scales perfectly well, no matter how many people you have, there are no problems. The more ballots you have to count, the more people you have to count the votes, the more people you have to watch the counting, to ensure that it's done properly. I don't understand why we need any other way. For hundreds of years (if not longer) paper voting has worked just fine. Why all of a sudden are we trying to fix something that was never broken.
On the other hand, why should we all being paying MS $500 for a copy of MS office 2009 when MSOffice 97 fulfills all of our needs. Because they don't sell Office 97 anymore. So if you want a copy of MSOffice, you have to pay for a license for the newest version. Maintaining such long copyright on things that aren't even sold anymore is depriving the public of a product that could otherwise be put to good use. If the 12 year old software is good enough, why do they keep on making changes and charging for upgrades.
Ignoring the religious zealots who try to push their religion on everyone else, there's nothing wrong with any of those religions. Just like there's nothing wrong with using Linux, or OSX, or BEOS, or FreeDos, or Windows. If it suits your needs then go ahead and use it. There sure aren't a lot of Hare Krishnas, but that doesn't mean their religion is a failure. They are right. If I use an OS and it works for me, then I'm not wrong for using it. If I practice a religion and it fulfills my spiritual needs, then I an not wrong for following that religion.
Personally, I think it's very possible to have a good story line. Just look at Metroid Prime. It has a pretty good story line. There's some people who say it's not an FPS, but it's from the first person perspective (for the most part), and I'm shooting things, so I'm not really sure what's missing from the equation. Maybe because they make you jump and solve puzzles and stuff, and don't spend your whole time just shooting bad guys, some people think it isn't an FPS. But as far as I can see, it is.
However, when they are selling to the American people, they are getting less per copy ($10 five years ago is worth more than what $10 is now). I don't think the price of books in the US has gone up lately, even though their dollar is tanking. As far as games go, aren't many/most games companies (apart from EA/MS) located in Japan? I think the Yen is doing pretty well, so that might explain why the US dollar seems to have no effect on the price of games. Then again, we all know that game prices are based on how much people are willing to pay, and not how much they actually cost to produce/manufacture. I personally think that they should make games cost less than $20, so that people will just buy a game that they like, instead of mulling over it, and trying to decide which game is the best deal for their money. They will just buy it, because it's so cheap (assuming it's a good game), and won't have to pick and choose between games.
On a more serious note, I used to leave the Nintendo on all the time because I wasn't done playing but wanted to go do something else. I remember we used to unplug the RF adapter from the back of the nintendo so we could still watch tv while the unit was still on. There was more than one time that I accidentally pulled the power cable instead. Not Fun:(.
Isn't he the dipshit who yammered about the superiority of the N64's cartridge format and dismissed Final Fantasy 7 as a slow and tedious game nobody would want to play?
If that's what he says then I am one of his biggest fans. When the N64 and PS1 came out, CD technology was way too slow for consoles. Loading times on the PS1 and PS2 were unbearable for me. Sorry if that makes me sound impatient, but waiting minutes for things to load is not what consoles are about. Also, FF7 was terrible. It's really fun to watch those 3 minute long attack sequences the first couple of times, but watching them over and over again for hours on end? I have never in my life needed a "skip-the-shit" button more then while playing FF7. Also, the extreme linearity of the game just made it even worse. Follow the path, no matter what you do, you can't change the story one little bit. That game was terrible. Compared to every FF game I played before that, it was the worst one by leaps and bounds. Games where you select "attack" from a menu are slow enough, no need to make them slower with 3 minute cutscenes every time you select attack.
Here's my point of view on "not enough good games". Personally, I only need a couple of games a year to satisfy my gaming needs. Between Zelda, Super Swing Golf, Super Monkey Ball, Wii Sports, and the virtual console, I'll be quite busy with my Wii until well after Christmas. I don't understand my friends who play through 10 FPS games in a year. If you can finish a game in that short a period of time, you're either spending too much time playing games, or the game wasn't worth the $60 you spent on it. Looking back at my GC, I had it for about 3 years, and have about 10 games. That's about all you should need. If the games are good, they will have good replayability, and you can play them for years to come. I don't care if there's only ever 200 games for the Wii, and the PS3 releases 3904 games, because I'm sure I'll find enough good content on the Wii to fill all my gaming time. With the quality of games you usually find on the Playstation, You might be hard pressed to find that much quality time, even with 10 times as many games.
Personally, I think both Mario and Zelda did very well on transitioning to 3D. Z:OOT wasn't my favourite, but I've found that WW and TP are both excellent games, and much more fun than playing Zelda 1. Do you remember the second quest of Zelda 1? Seriously, you're just supposed to guess which walls to walk through, and hope you have 100 rupees in your wallet or you give up a heart piece. Thank god for the Nintendo Atlas. Also, Mario 64 was about equal to where its 2D counterpart was. It followed Super Mario World, so it may have only looked so-so, but compared to SMB 1,2, and 3 it really was quite a great game.
I hear ya. I've been playing through Twilight Princess, and it's pretty slow going. If you don't have at least 1 hour to sit down and play, it's not even worth playing. Optimal is probably 2 hours. Some sections of the game take more than 2 hours to get through. Thank god for that headless wonder that lets you warp out of the dungeon so you can save. Too bad he's hidden (although not too well) in all the dungeons. I've currently played 25 hours, and I haven't seen any triforce yet. I love the game, and do play it quite a bit, but there's a lot of times when I'll pick up something I like less, just because I don't have 2 hours to play, or have something else happening and can't get right into the game. I'm happy that somebody is making games that don't take hours of play time just to be fun. Games like Bionic Commando with no save feature, and requiring an hour and a half to beat, are not the kind of games I want to be playing right now.
$90-$110 for a game? Wow, that's crazy. Just about every Wii game I've seen is $CDN 60. XBox360 and PS3 are $70. According to the exchange rage on xe.com, that comes out to $AUD 64.83 and $AUD 75.65 respecitively. You guys are getting majorly ripped off. Even accounting for the extra shipping costs, I could not see those prices making anywhere close to sense. Sometimes I wonder why AU and EU get so screwed over on prices of tech products. It's not like they have no population, or interest in the products.
Well, Nigeria has a population of about 140 million. If.01 % of the people in Nigeria have internet, then there's still 14,000 people with internet. 14,000 people can generate a lot of email. Even if it's just 100 individuals that are causing all the problems, then they could still generate a whole bunch of email. Plus, you can't just block all email from an entire country, Umaru Yar'Adua (President According to Wikipedia) would probably be pretty mad if he couldn't send out any email.
Since it seems that there are so many people interested in getting one of these for themselves, would it be possible to set up your own non-profit to distribute them to regular people? Possible things include charging extra and donating funds to the OLPC project or other such organizations. Seems like they refuse to sell them to end users, but why miss out on a market that is obviously there? Especially when it means increased production, which will bring down production costs, and allow extra funds to bring down the cost for the 3rd world countries.
But if you're running windows, even doing stuff like minimizing a window can cause it to get swapped to disk. Having an OS that does unnecessary swapping it probably worse than not swapping at all. I think that if you're running simple Email + Word Processing + Web, that you'd probably be better off without a swap file. Even with the disc cache and write buffer, you shouldn't get anywhere close to 2 GB. If you're doing something more advanced like using Photoshop, or running VS.Net, then maybe this option isn't right for you. However, I think that many people would benefit more from not having a swap file, and lots of memory than they would from having a swap file. Even on standard laptops with spinning drives, for which writing to the swap file means decreased battery life.
Just from a quick glance at the article, I couldn't figure out how long the battery actually lasts. Just that it has improved over some other model. How many hours does this thing actually get? I am not going to spend a lot of money on a laptop, till I get one with reasonable battery life. Something over 8 hours would be really nice. Until then, $4000 for a laptop is just too much. Sorry if I'm expecting too much, but with all the advancements they've made in laptops in the past 10 years, they still haven't made one that has a longer lasting battery. That seems to be the one killer feature that is missing.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes 33,000. The average person is only supposed to eat about 2000 calories. Based on your stature, you probably are eating less than 2000 calories. Personally, I'm not perfect, and nobody else is either. I eat about 2500 calories a day as far as I can figure, but I'm pretty active, so maybe that offsets it. In case anybody is wondering, I'm 5'8" and 160 lbs. Just checked my BMI and I'm at 24.3. That's on the border of overweight. And I consider myself quite skinny. I think the BMI is pretty seriously flawed, and doesn't account for anybody with any significant amount of muscle. I often wonder how much of these studies are offset by the fact that the BMI is such a bad metric for gaging overweightness.
Yes, there are some rare cases. However, the majority of fat people are not fat because of a thyroid problem. Using rare cases as a counterexample is not a very good argument. Almost 1/3 of the people in the US are obese. That's disgusting. Thyroid problems do not account for that high of a percentage of people being overweight.
I don't think they are handing out excuses. What they are saying is that people who hang out with lazy people don't exercise and don't eat well often don't exercise and don't eat well themselves. I imagine the same would also apply. If you hang out with people who eat vegan food and play soccer all day, then by doing what they do, you will probably stay pretty slim and in shape. Nobody is saying that you can't hang out with the fatties and remain skinny, or that you can't hang out with the vegan soccer players and gain weight, but that the people you hang out with can effect whether or not you are healthy. I also think it's kind of stupid that scientist try to find reasons or correlating actions to being overweight. We've figured this out a long time ago. Eat less (in terms of calories, not volume/weight of food), and exercise more and you will lose weight. Do the opposite, and you will gain weight. Very simple.
We have one guy at work who eats lunch at Wendy's every day. Not salad Wendy's, but frosty (milkshake), burger, and fries Wendy's. One day he grabbed a cinnamon roll at the connected Tim Hortons and talked about how he had a low carb lunch. He's not really that big, a bit overweight, possibly borderline obese according to BMI standards, but it's just so odd to listen to him talk about how he's trying to eat healthier, and then watch him go to Wendy's everyday.
I saw a show on discover/tlc/whatever the other day, about some severly overweight people. One guy ate 33000 Calories a day (actually, 33,000,000 calories, or 33,000 kilocalories if you want to be scientific). I thought about it, and that guy eats more in a day then I do in a week. Significantly more. They showed one of his meals, and it covered like an entire bed. Just the sausage course was like 6 sausages. there must have been at least 10 other plates there. All covered with greasy or sugar food. It was truly disgusting, and you wonder what the people bringing him the food (because he could no longer walk) were thinking.
Yes and no. On one hand, I remember hearing that babies have the potential to lean any language. Take a Chinese orphan, and bring them to America, and they will learn English no problem, with no accent. All babies have the potential to learn any language (or many languages). On the other hand, my laugh sounds exactly like my dad's. Not surprising until you find that I didn't live with my dad and didn't really spend much time with him at all. Many of our mannerisms are also the same. Like the way we walk, with a one hand in my pocket. The resemblence between our personalities is uncanny considering we didn't live together. So I have to ask, how much is based on what we see, and how much is based on our genes. The old nature vs. nurture question.
You may not personally see anything wrong with it. Some people don't personally see anything wrong with murdering someone. That doesn't mean it isn't against the law. That's the point the GP was trying to make. They should really outline that downloading ROMs may be or probably is illegal, and that you should consider this before embarking on this project.
If the punchscan system doesn't allow me show other people who I voted for, then how does it allow me to show myself who I voted for? Sure their scanned in copy looks the same as mine. Now, prove to me that showing me a scanned document proves that it was actually tallied correct (ie. the computer read the ballot as I would have), and that the same information was sent to the database.
I'm still trying to wrap my head around all this and fully understand how the punchscan system really works. And I have a University degree in software engineering. How do we expect the citizens with maybe only a highschool or lesser education to understand the system. Maybe the system is perfect (except that they can figure out who voted for who), but personally, I don't see why they need to make it such a complicated process that the average voter can't understand the details of how it works. I can understand every aspect of how pure paper voting works, and so can everyone else. I've gone through the punchscan site and all the demostrations of counting and auditing. I still don't really understand it fully. I understand the process, but I don't really understand how it makes voting any more secure.
So if all I can verify is that I voted for A, A, D, and C, then how can I actually verify that my vote was counted correctly. I'm not sure of all the details of the system, but it seems to me like it would be possible to show someone a scanned image of their sheet showing A, A, D, C while recording something completely different in the database. Also, am I the only one who thinks that understanding the voting process shouldn't require a PHD in computer science? I like the pen-and-paper-human-counted system because I completely understand how it works. With electronic voting machines, there's some organization saying, trust us, it works, don't worry about how it works, it just works. Diebold says the same thing about their systems, why should I believe one organization over another? What's wrong with a system that's simple enough for everyone to understand.
We do it in Canada, and since counting ballots scales perfectly well, no matter how many people you have, there are no problems. The more ballots you have to count, the more people you have to count the votes, the more people you have to watch the counting, to ensure that it's done properly. I don't understand why we need any other way. For hundreds of years (if not longer) paper voting has worked just fine. Why all of a sudden are we trying to fix something that was never broken.
On the other hand, why should we all being paying MS $500 for a copy of MS office 2009 when MSOffice 97 fulfills all of our needs. Because they don't sell Office 97 anymore. So if you want a copy of MSOffice, you have to pay for a license for the newest version. Maintaining such long copyright on things that aren't even sold anymore is depriving the public of a product that could otherwise be put to good use. If the 12 year old software is good enough, why do they keep on making changes and charging for upgrades.
Ignoring the religious zealots who try to push their religion on everyone else, there's nothing wrong with any of those religions. Just like there's nothing wrong with using Linux, or OSX, or BEOS, or FreeDos, or Windows. If it suits your needs then go ahead and use it. There sure aren't a lot of Hare Krishnas, but that doesn't mean their religion is a failure. They are right. If I use an OS and it works for me, then I'm not wrong for using it. If I practice a religion and it fulfills my spiritual needs, then I an not wrong for following that religion.
Personally, I think it's very possible to have a good story line. Just look at Metroid Prime. It has a pretty good story line. There's some people who say it's not an FPS, but it's from the first person perspective (for the most part), and I'm shooting things, so I'm not really sure what's missing from the equation. Maybe because they make you jump and solve puzzles and stuff, and don't spend your whole time just shooting bad guys, some people think it isn't an FPS. But as far as I can see, it is.
However, when they are selling to the American people, they are getting less per copy ($10 five years ago is worth more than what $10 is now). I don't think the price of books in the US has gone up lately, even though their dollar is tanking. As far as games go, aren't many/most games companies (apart from EA/MS) located in Japan? I think the Yen is doing pretty well, so that might explain why the US dollar seems to have no effect on the price of games. Then again, we all know that game prices are based on how much people are willing to pay, and not how much they actually cost to produce/manufacture. I personally think that they should make games cost less than $20, so that people will just buy a game that they like, instead of mulling over it, and trying to decide which game is the best deal for their money. They will just buy it, because it's so cheap (assuming it's a good game), and won't have to pick and choose between games.
You can't jump in Bioonic Commando..
:(.
On a more serious note, I used to leave the Nintendo on all the time because I wasn't done playing but wanted to go do something else. I remember we used to unplug the RF adapter from the back of the nintendo so we could still watch tv while the unit was still on. There was more than one time that I accidentally pulled the power cable instead. Not Fun
Here's my point of view on "not enough good games". Personally, I only need a couple of games a year to satisfy my gaming needs. Between Zelda, Super Swing Golf, Super Monkey Ball, Wii Sports, and the virtual console, I'll be quite busy with my Wii until well after Christmas. I don't understand my friends who play through 10 FPS games in a year. If you can finish a game in that short a period of time, you're either spending too much time playing games, or the game wasn't worth the $60 you spent on it. Looking back at my GC, I had it for about 3 years, and have about 10 games. That's about all you should need. If the games are good, they will have good replayability, and you can play them for years to come. I don't care if there's only ever 200 games for the Wii, and the PS3 releases 3904 games, because I'm sure I'll find enough good content on the Wii to fill all my gaming time. With the quality of games you usually find on the Playstation, You might be hard pressed to find that much quality time, even with 10 times as many games.
Personally, I think both Mario and Zelda did very well on transitioning to 3D. Z:OOT wasn't my favourite, but I've found that WW and TP are both excellent games, and much more fun than playing Zelda 1. Do you remember the second quest of Zelda 1? Seriously, you're just supposed to guess which walls to walk through, and hope you have 100 rupees in your wallet or you give up a heart piece. Thank god for the Nintendo Atlas. Also, Mario 64 was about equal to where its 2D counterpart was. It followed Super Mario World, so it may have only looked so-so, but compared to SMB 1,2, and 3 it really was quite a great game.
I hear ya. I've been playing through Twilight Princess, and it's pretty slow going. If you don't have at least 1 hour to sit down and play, it's not even worth playing. Optimal is probably 2 hours. Some sections of the game take more than 2 hours to get through. Thank god for that headless wonder that lets you warp out of the dungeon so you can save. Too bad he's hidden (although not too well) in all the dungeons. I've currently played 25 hours, and I haven't seen any triforce yet. I love the game, and do play it quite a bit, but there's a lot of times when I'll pick up something I like less, just because I don't have 2 hours to play, or have something else happening and can't get right into the game. I'm happy that somebody is making games that don't take hours of play time just to be fun. Games like Bionic Commando with no save feature, and requiring an hour and a half to beat, are not the kind of games I want to be playing right now.
$90-$110 for a game? Wow, that's crazy. Just about every Wii game I've seen is $CDN 60. XBox360 and PS3 are $70. According to the exchange rage on xe.com, that comes out to $AUD 64.83 and $AUD 75.65 respecitively. You guys are getting majorly ripped off. Even accounting for the extra shipping costs, I could not see those prices making anywhere close to sense. Sometimes I wonder why AU and EU get so screwed over on prices of tech products. It's not like they have no population, or interest in the products.
Well, Nigeria has a population of about 140 million. If .01 % of the people in Nigeria have internet, then there's still 14,000 people with internet. 14,000 people can generate a lot of email. Even if it's just 100 individuals that are causing all the problems, then they could still generate a whole bunch of email. Plus, you can't just block all email from an entire country, Umaru Yar'Adua (President According to Wikipedia) would probably be pretty mad if he couldn't send out any email.
Since it seems that there are so many people interested in getting one of these for themselves, would it be possible to set up your own non-profit to distribute them to regular people? Possible things include charging extra and donating funds to the OLPC project or other such organizations. Seems like they refuse to sell them to end users, but why miss out on a market that is obviously there? Especially when it means increased production, which will bring down production costs, and allow extra funds to bring down the cost for the 3rd world countries.
But if you're running windows, even doing stuff like minimizing a window can cause it to get swapped to disk. Having an OS that does unnecessary swapping it probably worse than not swapping at all. I think that if you're running simple Email + Word Processing + Web, that you'd probably be better off without a swap file. Even with the disc cache and write buffer, you shouldn't get anywhere close to 2 GB. If you're doing something more advanced like using Photoshop, or running VS.Net, then maybe this option isn't right for you. However, I think that many people would benefit more from not having a swap file, and lots of memory than they would from having a swap file. Even on standard laptops with spinning drives, for which writing to the swap file means decreased battery life.
Just from a quick glance at the article, I couldn't figure out how long the battery actually lasts. Just that it has improved over some other model. How many hours does this thing actually get? I am not going to spend a lot of money on a laptop, till I get one with reasonable battery life. Something over 8 hours would be really nice. Until then, $4000 for a laptop is just too much. Sorry if I'm expecting too much, but with all the advancements they've made in laptops in the past 10 years, they still haven't made one that has a longer lasting battery. That seems to be the one killer feature that is missing.