It won't cause a heart attack by itself. There may be some minor issues with acrylamide in slightly burnt parts of the crust, as with any high-temperature cooking method. However, a normal size pizza is somewhere around 12-1500 calories by itself, even more if you load it up with multiple kinds of cheese and lots of toppings that aren't vegetables. That doesn't leave much room for other food during the day. Can you live on pizza alone? Sure! But it probably isn't healthy, unless you're very careful about it.
Also
a slice of pizza with lots of green peppers and red peppers and tomato sauce and mushrooms and olives and 3 different cheeses and sausage and pepperoni and bacon and salami and onions and anchovies and jalapenos
Dude, take it easy with the toppings, you're overcrowding it and murdering the entire concept of pizza.
Thin crust, tomato sauce, cheese and a maximum of one(1) meat topping and optionally one(1) veggie topping. That's all you need. Let the ingredients have some room instead of smothering them and causing them to cover up their individual tastes.
It created the gangsters. Organized crime as we know it tiday in the US started during prohibition.
It also caused a shift in drinking culture. The overall average consumption fell, but people started binge drinking (why only have one or two drinks when you're at the speakeasy anyway? Have some more, while you can!), and they started drinking hard liquor instead of beer and wine, because it was easier to smuggle.
You can function perfectly fine without nicotine, no matter how addicted you are. Going cold turkey is going to suck for a while, but it won't kill you, and you'll be fine after a week or two.
The cheapest spirits are $40-$50 per liter, contrast with the U.S. where basic rotgut plastic-jug vodka is generally under $5/liter...
Really? That sounds rather excessively taxed.
I live in "over-taxed" Denmark, and I can get a perfectly drinkable bottle of vodka for AU$12 (700ml), of which AU$7.50 is tax. But as the tax is based on the ABV, not the sale price, it's completely negligible on more expensive, higher quality spirits. An AU$200 bottle of whisky at the same 40% ABV is still only taxed AU$7.50.
I guess it hits a bit harder for people with low incomes, but since the tax is so low in absolute terms, it's not much of an impact.
I absolutely agree that smoking is objectively much worse for innocent bystanders, compared to alcohol.
My point is that banning something outright simply doesn't work. People will just buy and consume the banned substances illegally, and possibly get wrapped up in worse crimes.
That's why I support sensible regulations, not outright bans.
So you've completely missed the news about various cities (and even countries) around the world looking to ban cars with internal combustion engines over the next 5-10-15 years?
And the alcohol monopolies in countries like Sweden, Norway and Finland, and various US states? And the associated heavy taxation on higher proof alcohol, which is meant to deter people from consuming it?
The only plumbing I do, is the stuff that requires cutting/joining copper pipe or stuff inside the walls. Anything with a threaded fitting, I do myself. It really isn't that hard.
Most of the work on my parents' house was done by themselves, only the stuff requiring heavy machinery and brickwork, stuff like underfloor plumbing and the like, was done by professionals.
It really isn't that hard, if you think about what you're doing and don't rush into it.
On Amazon and similar sites, I find it best to simply ignore the 5-star and 1-star reviews, because they're usually sycophantic for the 5-stars, and pissed off bullshit for the 1-stars.
The reviews in the middle are much more interesting, since they actually put some kind of effort into choosing a rating.
You see it a lot of places other than consumer ratings. For instance, whisky is commonly rated on a 0-100 scale, where 70 or below is considered "shit, not worth buying". Same thing with ratings in game magazines, where 70% is "crap" or "only for really dedicated fans".
And Ebay reviews. Every single time I buy something from China, I get a bunch of messages thanking me for shopping with them, and expressing an expectation that I will give them a perfect 5-star review, for nothing more than shipping me the item I bought.
Everything gets skewed to the high end of the range, so effectively you're only using half or even just a third of the actual scale.
If I had my way, we would all move to a simpler system, a 4-point scale at the very most, with a mandatory paragraph to elaborate on your rating:
0 stars for absolute shit 1 star for bad 2 stars for just OK 3 stars for good 4 stars for great
But unfortunately, that's A) far too simple for the numbers-obsessed sadcases who insist on rating everything on strict numbers, so they can go "but this is 3 more better than that other one" without having to think for themselves, and B) takes too much effort for the lazy fucks who inhabit this world and can't be arsed to write even a single cohesive paragraph about why they like/dislike a certain thing.
I have a Moto X Play (2 full days of battery life, woo!), and I appreciate the low-bloat stock ROM that Motorola uses. Or used to use. They have since been bought out by Lenovo, and it looks like it's the end of the line for good Moto phones with lean stock ROMs.
And the boomers continue to deny this, and constantly complain about "those lazy millenials", completely in denial about the fact that it's their own (and som gen-Xers') damn fault.
I know what you mean, and the feeling of distrust that you describe.
I'm not sure it's a defect as such, it was probably quite beneficial in the olden days, when resources were scarce, the overall population of humans was tiny, and long-distance travel was impossible or at least extremely rare. You rarely met people from other tribes/cultures, and if you did, they would probably try to kill you and steal your shit.
And that's why we need BOTH rural and urban areas, and have to learn to respect and understand each other's qualities.
I feel lucky that I've lived just about everywhere from rural to city, and I like to hang out both with manual laborers and with intellectuals, depending on what I'm doing. As long as people don't act like they're superior or look down on people, we'll probably get along just fine. Hell, one of my favorite people in the world is a bit of a nutcase conspiracy theorist Trump-loving Infowars-quoting weirdo, which probably couldn't be further from my own personal views. But we hang out and have fun together anyway, maybe sometimes because we both enjoy a spirited discussion, I don't know.
Counterpoint: I live in a city of ~1.2 million people, ~2 million in the greater metro area. It's not in the US, but I still think it's relevant. I've lived everywhere from rural areas with several kilometers to the nearest neighbor, to the city where I live now.
I grew up in a rural area, plenty of fresh air, areas to explore, places to go fish, all that good stuff. The nearest school had less than 100 students, we had a lot of trips to the nearby forests, we made viking age-style huts and cooked food over campfires at school every summer. We did all of the rural/small-town stuff, basically. I loved it, and I've got the scars to prove I had an active and exciting childhood.
Now I live in the city. I go to concerts, to the theater, to the cinema, to restaurants, to bars, to whisky/rum/wine/beer tastings. I work out at a local martial arts/crossfit gym. I'm on a music quiz team with a group of friends. I've been a volunteer track constructor at our historic motor race on the city streets every summer since 2010, I volunteer at a local rock/metal festival. I've lived here for almost 10 years, and I have yet to meet any psychotics, but I have met a lot of very interesting people from other cultures and viewpoints, and had some very interesting and enlightening discussions. And I love it here, because there are so many interesting things on offer, basically more life compressed into a smaller space. I get why some people don't like it, but I do.
My point is that both lifestyles can be great, I don't see why we should hate on people from a different area, just because they prefer something else. Why the hate?
Slashdot Mirror
Ban the fuckers, they contribute nothing positive at all.
It won't cause a heart attack by itself. There may be some minor issues with acrylamide in slightly burnt parts of the crust, as with any high-temperature cooking method. However, a normal size pizza is somewhere around 12-1500 calories by itself, even more if you load it up with multiple kinds of cheese and lots of toppings that aren't vegetables. That doesn't leave much room for other food during the day. Can you live on pizza alone? Sure! But it probably isn't healthy, unless you're very careful about it.
Also
a slice of pizza with lots of green peppers and red peppers and tomato sauce and mushrooms and olives and 3 different cheeses and sausage and pepperoni and bacon and salami and onions and anchovies and jalapenos
Dude, take it easy with the toppings, you're overcrowding it and murdering the entire concept of pizza.
Thin crust, tomato sauce, cheese and a maximum of one(1) meat topping and optionally one(1) veggie topping. That's all you need. Let the ingredients have some room instead of smothering them and causing them to cover up their individual tastes.
It created the gangsters. Organized crime as we know it tiday in the US started during prohibition.
It also caused a shift in drinking culture. The overall average consumption fell, but people started binge drinking (why only have one or two drinks when you're at the speakeasy anyway? Have some more, while you can!), and they started drinking hard liquor instead of beer and wine, because it was easier to smuggle.
You can function perfectly fine without nicotine, no matter how addicted you are. Going cold turkey is going to suck for a while, but it won't kill you, and you'll be fine after a week or two.
A country-wide ban of alcohol was tried in the US, in the 1920s. It did not work out.
You're not going to get your favorite drugs legalized by demonizing other drugs. It doesn't work like that.
The cheapest spirits are $40-$50 per liter, contrast with the U.S. where basic rotgut plastic-jug vodka is generally under $5/liter...
Really? That sounds rather excessively taxed.
I live in "over-taxed" Denmark, and I can get a perfectly drinkable bottle of vodka for AU$12 (700ml), of which AU$7.50 is tax. But as the tax is based on the ABV, not the sale price, it's completely negligible on more expensive, higher quality spirits. An AU$200 bottle of whisky at the same 40% ABV is still only taxed AU$7.50.
I guess it hits a bit harder for people with low incomes, but since the tax is so low in absolute terms, it's not much of an impact.
I absolutely agree that smoking is objectively much worse for innocent bystanders, compared to alcohol.
My point is that banning something outright simply doesn't work. People will just buy and consume the banned substances illegally, and possibly get wrapped up in worse crimes.
That's why I support sensible regulations, not outright bans.
So you've completely missed the news about various cities (and even countries) around the world looking to ban cars with internal combustion engines over the next 5-10-15 years?
And the alcohol monopolies in countries like Sweden, Norway and Finland, and various US states? And the associated heavy taxation on higher proof alcohol, which is meant to deter people from consuming it?
But then where do you stop? Will you ban alcohol as well?
Oh, I'll definitely use PEX when/if the need arises. It just hasn't, yet :-)
The only plumbing I don't do, that is.
The only plumbing I do, is the stuff that requires cutting/joining copper pipe or stuff inside the walls. Anything with a threaded fitting, I do myself. It really isn't that hard.
Most of the work on my parents' house was done by themselves, only the stuff requiring heavy machinery and brickwork, stuff like underfloor plumbing and the like, was done by professionals.
It really isn't that hard, if you think about what you're doing and don't rush into it.
Wakka wakka :-(
I only use my Windows installation for games, nothing that actually matters.
On Amazon and similar sites, I find it best to simply ignore the 5-star and 1-star reviews, because they're usually sycophantic for the 5-stars, and pissed off bullshit for the 1-stars.
The reviews in the middle are much more interesting, since they actually put some kind of effort into choosing a rating.
With Malwarebytes and BitDefender. I don't go for the big all-in-one "security quites", so the simpler approach works great for me.
No, that's David Cameron.
You see it a lot of places other than consumer ratings. For instance, whisky is commonly rated on a 0-100 scale, where 70 or below is considered "shit, not worth buying". Same thing with ratings in game magazines, where 70% is "crap" or "only for really dedicated fans".
And Ebay reviews. Every single time I buy something from China, I get a bunch of messages thanking me for shopping with them, and expressing an expectation that I will give them a perfect 5-star review, for nothing more than shipping me the item I bought.
Everything gets skewed to the high end of the range, so effectively you're only using half or even just a third of the actual scale.
If I had my way, we would all move to a simpler system, a 4-point scale at the very most, with a mandatory paragraph to elaborate on your rating:
0 stars for absolute shit
1 star for bad
2 stars for just OK
3 stars for good
4 stars for great
But unfortunately, that's A) far too simple for the numbers-obsessed sadcases who insist on rating everything on strict numbers, so they can go "but this is 3 more better than that other one" without having to think for themselves, and B) takes too much effort for the lazy fucks who inhabit this world and can't be arsed to write even a single cohesive paragraph about why they like/dislike a certain thing.
I have a Moto X Play (2 full days of battery life, woo!), and I appreciate the low-bloat stock ROM that Motorola uses. Or used to use. They have since been bought out by Lenovo, and it looks like it's the end of the line for good Moto phones with lean stock ROMs.
The radio has to be on for it to work, it has to receive the coded FM signal to know when to switch channels.
I usually just have my radio on, but muted if I'm just driving around.
And the boomers continue to deny this, and constantly complain about "those lazy millenials", completely in denial about the fact that it's their own (and som gen-Xers') damn fault.
I know what you mean, and the feeling of distrust that you describe.
I'm not sure it's a defect as such, it was probably quite beneficial in the olden days, when resources were scarce, the overall population of humans was tiny, and long-distance travel was impossible or at least extremely rare. You rarely met people from other tribes/cultures, and if you did, they would probably try to kill you and steal your shit.
Doesn't really work all that well today, though.
And that's why we need BOTH rural and urban areas, and have to learn to respect and understand each other's qualities.
I feel lucky that I've lived just about everywhere from rural to city, and I like to hang out both with manual laborers and with intellectuals, depending on what I'm doing. As long as people don't act like they're superior or look down on people, we'll probably get along just fine. Hell, one of my favorite people in the world is a bit of a nutcase conspiracy theorist Trump-loving Infowars-quoting weirdo, which probably couldn't be further from my own personal views. But we hang out and have fun together anyway, maybe sometimes because we both enjoy a spirited discussion, I don't know.
Counterpoint: I live in a city of ~1.2 million people, ~2 million in the greater metro area. It's not in the US, but I still think it's relevant. I've lived everywhere from rural areas with several kilometers to the nearest neighbor, to the city where I live now.
I grew up in a rural area, plenty of fresh air, areas to explore, places to go fish, all that good stuff. The nearest school had less than 100 students, we had a lot of trips to the nearby forests, we made viking age-style huts and cooked food over campfires at school every summer. We did all of the rural/small-town stuff, basically. I loved it, and I've got the scars to prove I had an active and exciting childhood.
Now I live in the city. I go to concerts, to the theater, to the cinema, to restaurants, to bars, to whisky/rum/wine/beer tastings. I work out at a local martial arts/crossfit gym. I'm on a music quiz team with a group of friends. I've been a volunteer track constructor at our historic motor race on the city streets every summer since 2010, I volunteer at a local rock/metal festival. I've lived here for almost 10 years, and I have yet to meet any psychotics, but I have met a lot of very interesting people from other cultures and viewpoints, and had some very interesting and enlightening discussions. And I love it here, because there are so many interesting things on offer, basically more life compressed into a smaller space. I get why some people don't like it, but I do.
My point is that both lifestyles can be great, I don't see why we should hate on people from a different area, just because they prefer something else. Why the hate?