The body already kills most cancer cells before they reproduce. A healthy body will be more successful at killing cancer cells than a weak body, and one of the things that promotes a healthy body is eating well. Nutrient-poor foods like cookies, candy, and carbonated soft drinks make it tougher for the body to stay healthy. It doesn't take esoteric diets to eat well, just eat a reasoned variety of quality fresh foods and the odds of not getting cancer improve. There are no guarantees.
Countless studies have been done on both green tea and turmeric. The Life Extension Foundation (lef.org) cites many occasionally. Both substances reduce the chance of getting cancer but don't cure it.
Look, it's well established that some things, like smoking, encourage cancer. Some things ameliorate the effects of smoking (like vitamin C), and those same things also help against environmental factors that promote cancer. There are many available food supplements that (statistically) provide partial protection against cancer, and for $1000 a year a person can improve his odds by using a dozen of them.
Many chips are now pad limited. That means that no matter how tiny the process is, the die can't get any smaller, because bonding machinery requires a minimum pad size to connect to the world outside the IC package.
We're not talking about broadcasting here. This is more like a transformer with the primary on the floor and the secondary on the bottom of the car outside the metal body. The trick is making the gap from primary to secondary small enough to minimize stray magnetic fields, and finding a frequency range that makes the gap tolerable without requiring too expensive electronics for generating the high frequency.
Halogens run about 30% or 40% more efficient than conventional incandescents, which is not "FAR better". They're more expensive and more dangerous, because the envelope must run very hot.
The proper role of the CEO is to direct the company so that it makes as much money as ethically possible. A CEO's pay should be in proportion to his ability and success in doing so, better than anyone else can. If his leadership results in a company earning $2 billion a year that nobody else can make earn $1 billion a year, then he deserves a large portion of that second billion. The janitor hasn't done anything special to earn the billion, and doesn't deserve extra because the company is doing well.
In line with the growth of the GDP. His pay should track the rest of the economy when he's spectacularly and uniquely effective? Why?
Angry mobs don't spontaneously generate. There's somebody driving the mob's existence, often planning it well in advance, hoping to gain political power or damage someone or something he hates. Mob members look forward to such opportunities to loot, except for nihilists who look forward to an opportunity to destroy.
Anger or violence as a response to income disparity is irrational, immoral, and self-destructive.
The only "principle" we have is that everyone is entitles to a good life, with food, shelter and health care
At whose cost? Earned by doing what? Your good life, with food, shelter and health care, does not come into existence with each new birth, nor is it pre-existing. It must be made by humans, by their dedicated effort, and it should be retained by the person who makes it or trades their efforts for it. It is not to be taken by you or anyone else with nothing of value to exchange.
Equality of results, and justice, cannot coexist. You can have one, the other, or neither.
A person who does not work, and has never tried to work, deserves nothing. Someone who encourages such behavior, someone who supports such a person (assumed to be an able adult), is destructive of society, and evil.
You might spend some time looking at the history of supermarkets over the last 60 years. Where is the Great Atlantic and Pacific Tea Company (A&P), once feared to be on its way to monopolizing the supermarket industry?
Meaningful work??? What the hell is that? Is a person somehow hurt because he cannot see some "meaning" in whatever work he does, that he's paid for, that makes it possible for him to earn a living?
The direct human action (how curious that you chose the title of the magnum opus of the great free market economist, Ludwig von Mises) that works best is that of the people directly involved, the people who spend their lives working in a particular company, the employer and employees. Anyone in government will know less of any particular company, much less the individuals involved, and so will make much poorer choices (nor does the bureaucrat have any incentive to make the proper choices.) Worse yet, someone in government is likely to be regulating the activities of several companies, perhaps in several industries, and will not only have an even poorer grasp on the situation at each company, but be vulnerable to bribes from companies seeking to get a dishonest advantage over its competitors.
Lack of government planning does not mean lack of planning. It means planning by the ignorant, by those subject to political pressure, by those who enjoy having power over others without responsibility for any damage that may cause, by those with an axe to grind or an enemy to damage, or....
Government enforcing a contract that one party isn't honoring, is restoring the honor of the contract. That a person pays for what he gets and gets what he pays for is the essence of justice. That is moral.
Government forcing a pay ratio is creating an injustice, for either the low paid person will be getting more, through force, than he could honestly earn, or the high paid person is forced to get less than his efforts are worth. That is unjust; that is immoral.
___
That you do not understand that there is more to a contract than the fallback to government force, is a severe indication of your moral vacuity. A contract helps make an explicit, permanent record of an agreement, that otherwise might be forgotten or more easily misunderstood. Breaching a contract damages a person's reputation; others will be less willing to do business with such a person and his dishonesty will hurt him.
For example, I have several times not bought a product because internet reviews have shown the manufacturer unwilling to honor a guarantee.
Set up a two-dimensional array representing rational numbers with natural numbers on both axes. Numbers on the horizontal axis represent the numerator, numbers on the vertical axis the denominator. Then take elements in the following order: 1,1 2,1 1,2 3,1 2,2 1,3 4,1 3,2 2,3 1,4 5,1....
Start along a new diagonal each time the current diagonal is exhausted. In such manner, a countable set of all (positive/positive) rational numbers is arranged in a countable fashion, and the method is trivially extended to cover non-positive entries.
I bought a 1 GB Micropolis SCSI drive back when they were fairly new. After a couple of years it developed a nasty habit of failing to spin up, usually requiring 2 or 3 turnons before it would work. I always feared it would just freeze and I'd be without a computer.
Slashdot Mirror
What part of "normal circumstances" do you not understand?
The body already kills most cancer cells before they reproduce. A healthy body will be more successful at killing cancer cells than a weak body, and one of the things that promotes a healthy body is eating well. Nutrient-poor foods like cookies, candy, and carbonated soft drinks make it tougher for the body to stay healthy. It doesn't take esoteric diets to eat well, just eat a reasoned variety of quality fresh foods and the odds of not getting cancer improve. There are no guarantees.
Countless studies have been done on both green tea and turmeric. The Life Extension Foundation (lef.org) cites many occasionally. Both substances reduce the chance of getting cancer but don't cure it.
Look, it's well established that some things, like smoking, encourage cancer. Some things ameliorate the effects of smoking (like vitamin C), and those same things also help against environmental factors that promote cancer. There are many available food supplements that (statistically) provide partial protection against cancer, and for $1000 a year a person can improve his odds by using a dozen of them.
AMD has been desperate for cash for many years. They would have already gone belly up without the money they got for selling off the fabs.
Many chips are now pad limited. That means that no matter how tiny the process is, the die can't get any smaller, because bonding machinery requires a minimum pad size to connect to the world outside the IC package.
We're not talking about broadcasting here. This is more like a transformer with the primary on the floor and the secondary on the bottom of the car outside the metal body. The trick is making the gap from primary to secondary small enough to minimize stray magnetic fields, and finding a frequency range that makes the gap tolerable without requiring too expensive electronics for generating the high frequency.
Halogens run about 30% or 40% more efficient than conventional incandescents, which is not "FAR better". They're more expensive and more dangerous, because the envelope must run very hot.
43 years ago there was a student at MIT who put a car battery and a starter motor on his bicycle. Now it's a big deal?
Mussolini got the trains to run on time. That the mechanisms of tyranny are working is not a good thing.
Why?
The proper role of the CEO is to direct the company so that it makes as much money as ethically possible. A CEO's pay should be in proportion to his ability and success in doing so, better than anyone else can. If his leadership results in a company earning $2 billion a year that nobody else can make earn $1 billion a year, then he deserves a large portion of that second billion. The janitor hasn't done anything special to earn the billion, and doesn't deserve extra because the company is doing well.
In line with the growth of the GDP. His pay should track the rest of the economy when he's spectacularly and uniquely effective? Why?
Angry mobs don't spontaneously generate. There's somebody driving the mob's existence, often planning it well in advance, hoping to gain political power or damage someone or something he hates. Mob members look forward to such opportunities to loot, except for nihilists who look forward to an opportunity to destroy.
Anger or violence as a response to income disparity is irrational, immoral, and self-destructive.
At whose cost? Earned by doing what? Your good life, with food, shelter and health care, does not come into existence with each new birth, nor is it pre-existing. It must be made by humans, by their dedicated effort, and it should be retained by the person who makes it or trades their efforts for it. It is not to be taken by you or anyone else with nothing of value to exchange.
And the difference between a goal and an ideal is?
Equality of results, and justice, cannot coexist. You can have one, the other, or neither.
A person who does not work, and has never tried to work, deserves nothing. Someone who encourages such behavior, someone who supports such a person (assumed to be an able adult), is destructive of society, and evil.
You might spend some time looking at the history of supermarkets over the last 60 years. Where is the Great Atlantic and Pacific Tea Company (A&P), once feared to be on its way to monopolizing the supermarket industry?
Meaningful work ??? What the hell is that? Is a person somehow hurt because he cannot see some "meaning" in whatever work he does, that he's paid for, that makes it possible for him to earn a living?
The direct human action (how curious that you chose the title of the magnum opus of the great free market economist, Ludwig von Mises) that works best is that of the people directly involved, the people who spend their lives working in a particular company, the employer and employees. Anyone in government will know less of any particular company, much less the individuals involved, and so will make much poorer choices (nor does the bureaucrat have any incentive to make the proper choices.) Worse yet, someone in government is likely to be regulating the activities of several companies, perhaps in several industries, and will not only have an even poorer grasp on the situation at each company, but be vulnerable to bribes from companies seeking to get a dishonest advantage over its competitors.
Lack of government planning does not mean lack of planning. It means planning by the ignorant, by those subject to political pressure, by those who enjoy having power over others without responsibility for any damage that may cause, by those with an axe to grind or an enemy to damage, or....
Government enforcing a contract that one party isn't honoring, is restoring the honor of the contract. That a person pays for what he gets and gets what he pays for is the essence of justice. That is moral.
Government forcing a pay ratio is creating an injustice, for either the low paid person will be getting more, through force, than he could honestly earn, or the high paid person is forced to get less than his efforts are worth. That is unjust; that is immoral.
___
That you do not understand that there is more to a contract than the fallback to government force, is a severe indication of your moral vacuity. A contract helps make an explicit, permanent record of an agreement, that otherwise might be forgotten or more easily misunderstood. Breaching a contract damages a person's reputation; others will be less willing to do business with such a person and his dishonesty will hurt him.
For example, I have several times not bought a product because internet reviews have shown the manufacturer unwilling to honor a guarantee.
Depends upon the country. In Mexico, penicillin is available dirt-cheap without a prescription.
You have to deal with a homeowner's association if you inherit property under its control.
Wrong
Set up a two-dimensional array representing rational numbers with natural numbers on both axes. Numbers on the horizontal axis represent the numerator, numbers on the vertical axis the denominator. Then take elements in the following order: 1,1 2,1 1,2 3,1 2,2 1,3 4,1 3,2 2,3 1,4 5,1 ....
Start along a new diagonal each time the current diagonal is exhausted. In such manner, a countable set of all (positive/positive) rational numbers is arranged in a countable fashion, and the method is trivially extended to cover non-positive entries.
The last Carolina Parakeet was killed by an ornithologist. It's not just hunters.
Is that limpet mine?
The proper word is "failure" or "failing". "Fail" is only a noun in the imagination of trendy fools.
I bought a 1 GB Micropolis SCSI drive back when they were fairly new. After a couple of years it developed a nasty habit of failing to spin up, usually requiring 2 or 3 turnons before it would work. I always feared it would just freeze and I'd be without a computer.