"On that note, I'm pretty sure most SSD makers use 1 KB = 1024 bytes, because it's more convenient for them."
Hell no. If you read the descriptions of the Intel G2 and OCZ Vertex (together with Samsung the most interesting drives IMHO), you'll see both drives are using the metric system. OCZ is funny since its 30 GB drives are really 32 GB drives (that's 32,000,000,000 if you are still not assured of this). However OCZ is marketing them as 30 GB drives because the OS will take about 2 GB for indexing. So they have taken an even more direct road: you can actually store 30 GB of files on them. I'm personally thinking that is taking it a bit too far; you don't really know how much is going to be used for indexing.
From the Intel data sheet for their 80/160GB 34 nm G2 drives (the latest and greatest)
Giga-byte defined as 1x109 bytes. The total usable capacity of the Intel SSD may be less than the total physical capacity of the Intel SSD. This is due to the fact that a small portion of the Intel SSD capacity is used for NAND flash management and maintenance purposes.
From the OCZ Vertex site:
Consumers may see a discrepancy between reported capacity and actual capacity; the storage industry standard is to display capacity in decimal. However, the operating system usually calculates capacity in binary format, causing traditional HDD and SSD to show a lower capacity in Windows. In the case of SSDs, some of the capacity is reserved for formatting and redundancy for wear leveling. These reserved areas on an SSD may occupy up to 5% of the driveâ(TM)s storage capacity. On the Vertex Series the naming convention reflects this and the 30 is equivalent to 32GB, the 60 is equivalent to the 64GB and so on.
First of all, a byte has never been inherently 8 bits (and thus never has been inherently base 2), see for instance the *first* line on Wikipedia. It's just a convention that got adopted. But generally, no matter which base, a computer will always understand and calculate sizes, no matter if they are base 2 or base 10. How many people can really calculate in base 2? And why should we?
Hey, lets invent a machine, decide that base 2 is easiest to implement and hey, just let the entire human race try to do calculations base 2. This for a machine that was calculated to do the fucking calculations FOR US. How is that for stupid?
... and no argument at all why it should not have been base 10, such as in use long before since forever. Base 2 should never have been used from the start. Let the machines calculate, it's what they do best.
"And to do this, they have changed a standard unit of measure."
Bullocks. What they did was *revert back* to the standard unit of measure. What when bytes where 7 or 9 bits? Were you complaining back then? Shouldn't we be calling it an octet?
"I challenge you to show me an internet connection or even a hard drive that can get anywhere near a gigabit of throughput."
Book a flight to Amsterdam and I'll show you my Intel consumer SSD that runs at 250 MB/s *continuously*. In a cheap laptop with gigabit LAN. Or of course my RAM drive where I unzip movies to.
Besides, there is such a thing called latency, which I like to be low for any kind of application. Speed helps for that.
Don't forget that both WEP and WPA/TKIP are using proprietary algorithms and stream ciphers. Using proprietary crypto has always been a bad thing, and using it with a stream cipher is worse. WEP/WPA failing so fast does not mean that WPA2 using the much safer AES standard (in a security proven mode) should fail as fast.
If you look at the Wikipedia site you can quickly see that TKIP was implemented for easy upgrades of WEP. Seems they took it a bit too easy.
How will current software interact with this chip and be transparent for current applications? Software support in things like IPSec libraries for this hardware is going to be important.
This is Sun. They sell the whole stack - computer, OS, compiler, and so on. You can bet that Sun Java running on Sun Solaris, running on a Sun UltraSPARC will use the coprocessor. The Solaris version of OpenSSL almost certainly will too.
Yes, of course, through their pkcs#11 provider, to be precise. Any application that can use PKCS#11 will be able to use this acceleration. Of course, *some* configuration will likely still have to take place. Java is actually pretty good already, you can simply add a security provider to the top of the list to accelerate any application. OpenSSL can work through PKCS#11 engine nowadays as well.
Is this a response to the Sparc's lack of CPU grunt compared with other processors? If it is then it's going to make Sparc even more expensive relative to the competition.
Not sure how you figure that. Something like the OMAP3530 can decode H.264 in a tiny power envelope compared to something like a Core 2, and yet costs much less. Why? Because it uses dedicated silicon for the decoding. General purpose processors use much more power and, for the same transistor budget run much more slowly than dedicated hardware. If the typical workload for a T2 is very crypto-heavy then adding a dedicated a crypto coprocessor will use less power and give better performance than adding another core. This is why most ARM chips include a number of coprocessors for workloads that are common in handhelds.
Yeah, and don't forget that transistors are pretty cheap compared to going for the latest chip technology/speeds.
It's easier to update software than it is to update silicon or chips. How will this approach and this chip fare in a few years when technology and software has moved on?
But it's slower to replace standards than either, and encryption standards require years of peer review before they are approved.
Yup. Currently crypto instruction sets are pretty useful for specifically AES and hardware random number generation. SHA-1/256 acceleration is also useful of course, but SHA-3 is in the works - the NIST competition will run for at least another two years though. A Montgomery coprocessor (for DH, RSA and EC cryptography) may also be useful, but less than the AES and hash methods since signatures and key agreement are normally not performed as often, even though the time per encrypted byte is much higher.
I would advice CPU manufacturers to only implement a single round at a time though, so it is easier to add rounds and play with the algorithm before the round starts or after it ends. E.g. hash algorithms based on AES should be easier to be constructed this way. Same goes for the SHA-1 and 2 rounds. There is some talk about doubling the number of AES rounds already, and some hash methods in the NIST competition rely on AES rounds.
This history of co-processors for specific jobs has never been a very happy or long-lived one.
Yup, no modern CPUs contain on-chip floating point or vector coprocessors. Well, none except for all of them. And no modern computers contain graphics coprocessors.
Ha, pretty ironic. We'll just forget the FPU because it is completely integrated by now:)
It looks like a way of making up for the inherant lack of grunt on the Sparc platform, so maybe it will reduce encryption costs as far as that platform is concerned.
Not sure what you mean by 'inherent lack of grunt'. For highly parallel workloads (e.g. web serving, lots of database workloads), there isn't much that beats a T2 in terms of throughput at the moment, and noth
I don't know, if I copy my "c:\java" folder at work I end up with literally gigabytes of open source libs, API's etc. all neatly arranged. It would take quite some time to get them back. Some sources are even hard to trace, I've got a open source Java version of the linux/GNU "file" command somewhere, taken from a media server or such. Can't find it anymore. If I would copy that folder I would have some general purpose libs that I compiled myself as well. Yes, I could just take the directory tree and be done with it, but why not copy the folder minus the company libs? And after that a mistake is easy to make.
Not that I would do such a thing, (besides being unable to move this much info from my system anyway), but I could imagine that it is likely that people do such things. Hey, maybe he was even developing the O/S software. Encryption? I am so used to encrypting *any* application that I am sending out of the door that I would probably do it automatically. If only to confuse the company virus scanner.
How many manufactures are going to build these things. I know they are wildly popular due to cost, but come on, they are all the same.
They all use the same hardware. They all pretty much use the same software. Some look slightly different, maybe.
Although the Asus ones seemed OK, most of the clones seemed crap to me. Only Dell seemed to have made a decent clone. All the others were crap at battery life.
Atom 1.6ghz. 1GB RAM. 160GB HD. Wifi etc... big honking deal.
Hi speed internet and much needed synchronization and GPS are certainly nothing to be sneezed at though. Design and battery life seem great as well.
Maybe they will change something who knows.
I also notice that it has a HDMI port for HD out... um why? Other than you brag you have it I see this as somewhat useless. Will it have video that can handle HD? Likely not. Will it have a HD that you can store lots of HD stuff on? Not really. Will it have a BluRay optical drive? Um No. Is watching HD on a 10 in screen stupid? Likely yes.
Will I prefer my 1920x1080 screen to a 10 inch netbook screen? Hell yes. Will it make it easier to setup a connection compared to VGA or composite? Most likely it will.
No idea what HSDPA is? Though it says (3.5G) which sounds like a cell network protocol. Which is great if it is in your area, of which they likely only cover metro areas or 2% of the actual area...
Speak for yourself. In the Netherlands there's a lot of 3G coverage. It's the one thing missing from my laptop.
Oh yeah and 12 hours battery life? OK at this point EVERYONE knows they all lie through their teeth about battery time, but really do you think we are all stupid now. Have we gotten the the point where the lies don't have to be plausible. All they need now is some disclaimer someplace that says that it was tested with nothing running, the power off, closed, and that is the natural dissipation rate of their battery and includes no usage, or in other words a totally pointless and worthless test of capability.
Yes, we'll have to wait for the previews for that. They won't be able to go under the EEE PC's battery time after promising this. The big question that remains is the screen. How well will the laptop perform when the screen is bright enough to be viewed.
Mine neither, it's a Philips high end screen. Most of the ones now in the store do have VGA. It's a bit of a shame since my fan-less mobo is not supported (I don't count the video out if you don't mind). Of course my laptop has no problems at all, even at 1920x1080 and using lowly Intel integrated video. It works perfectly, at least after I tell the TV that it should leave the signal alone (otherwise it will try and overcompensate movement).
If I compare HDMI cables with all the trouble of analogue signals that I've seen, it's a no brainer. It takes just a second or two trying to start the signal, but otherwise it's perfect.
Yeah, but if you go and put each genetic difference in another league, you would end up with 6 billion leagues. It's bad enough that we require two groups (for the obvious differences would mean that no woman could ever win a physical competition). It's not like it is a huge problem when one "advanced" woman comes a long and messes up only the top spot. Woman still can win and will have a great time trying to break the previous record set by this "abnormal" person.
"I think it has to come down to whether a deviation is grossly abnormal or within what would be considered as normal."
Well, if it is "grossly" abnormal, then good for her.
"Michael Phelps, although physically advantaged to swimming, still has normal body proportions. If his arms or feet were grossly and abnormally long, would it still be considered fair?"
She has been treated as a girl from right at birth. She has been checked all her life when she was competing as *IT SAYS RIGHT IN TFA*. Who are we to say she isn't one when she starts to be competitive at the highest level?
She never had any choice in this, as you suggest.
All the other athletes are already using their own "unfair" advantages to be competitive. Now they meet someone who's got that double.
It's the way genders are tested at birth and we keep treating persons this way. To exclude her from any competition would create a really bad precedent. It's an easy test, and it's fair. Whatever other genetic or hormonal differences there are are given to her at birth. She probably did not have an easy life as she looked so much as a boy. Now she excels at something and only when she starts to compete at the highest level we are going to say, sorry, but your life as an athlete has ended, since you are not one of us?
Just take her physics into account when you remember the records. And stop taking those lists too seriously. Watch the races and enjoy.
Trackballs that are controlled by thumb are dumb, since the thumb is not meant for moving sideways, it was designed for grabbing things. Since my thumb hurts more easily than my shoulder or wrist, I would never use one.
If you have a glass desk where you have your laptop on for more than 4H a day, it is better than buying a new desk or having to put up with one of those crap mouse pads.
Personally I've used a laser mouse on reflecting surfaces and they seem to do OK. And I don't like glass desks since they cool down my wrists too much.
A good mice lasts forever nowadays, only the wires seem to be wearing out after a while. I've got no trouble spending a bit more on a mice if it means better control (less resistance for RSI).
Either the wires are broken or there is a small piece of hair lodged in the hole with the laser and optical sensor. If the reflecting hair moves around the "camera" will try and track the movement. Mouse pads are brilliant in gathering dust and particles, which is the reason I don't use them any more, I'm using a very smooth desktop instead.
On a more humorous note: especially small curly types of hair seem to be good at lodging themselves in, so this may also be a good indicator of a specific type of internet usage.
Each to his own, but I still get into situations where I think of THHGTTG quotes. With all their humor, some of the things said are pretty insightful. The way the stories connect to the real world is what, IMHO, makes the HHGTTG an all time favorite. It is part of a/very/ select number of books that I've read more than twice.
I've got the "more than complete hitchhikers guide" (missing one book) and the comments of the intro are already brilliant. Laying on a field with the world slowly spinning around him. Taking a few baths and a degree in English. Priceless, even now.
You are twisting the conversation. The discussion was that it is much easier to buy junk food for 20 dollars a week than healthy alternatives.
Even I, with a relatively good income, find fruit and veggies quite expensive. E.g. I can buy a rather large bag of generic potato chips, or two pieces of fruit for 1 euro over here. The potato chips will definitely let me feel less hungry than the two pieces of fruit, but I'm pretty sure that the pieces of fruit will have more nutrients.
We've also thrown natural selection right out of the window. That'll have some effects, but I don't know the term. I'm obviously not for some kind of Gataka, but it will be interesting how this is going to play out in the end. One thing is certain, medical science is not advancing fast enough for me to see the end:)
Slashdot Mirror
"On that note, I'm pretty sure most SSD makers use 1 KB = 1024 bytes, because it's more convenient for them."
Hell no. If you read the descriptions of the Intel G2 and OCZ Vertex (together with Samsung the most interesting drives IMHO), you'll see both drives are using the metric system. OCZ is funny since its 30 GB drives are really 32 GB drives (that's 32,000,000,000 if you are still not assured of this). However OCZ is marketing them as 30 GB drives because the OS will take about 2 GB for indexing. So they have taken an even more direct road: you can actually store 30 GB of files on them. I'm personally thinking that is taking it a bit too far; you don't really know how much is going to be used for indexing.
From the Intel data sheet for their 80/160GB 34 nm G2 drives (the latest and greatest)
Giga-byte defined as 1x109 bytes. The total usable capacity of the Intel SSD may be less
than the total physical capacity of the Intel SSD. This is due to the fact that a small portion
of the Intel SSD capacity is used for NAND flash management and maintenance purposes.
From the OCZ Vertex site:
Consumers may see a discrepancy between reported capacity and actual capacity; the storage industry standard is to display capacity in decimal. However, the operating system usually calculates capacity in binary format, causing traditional HDD and SSD to show a lower capacity in Windows. In the case of SSDs, some of the capacity is reserved for formatting and redundancy for wear leveling. These reserved areas on an SSD may occupy up to 5% of the driveâ(TM)s storage capacity. On the Vertex Series the naming convention reflects this and the 30 is equivalent to 32GB, the 60 is equivalent to the 64GB and so on.
First of all, a byte has never been inherently 8 bits (and thus never has been inherently base 2), see for instance the *first* line on Wikipedia. It's just a convention that got adopted. But generally, no matter which base, a computer will always understand and calculate sizes, no matter if they are base 2 or base 10. How many people can really calculate in base 2? And why should we?
Hey, lets invent a machine, decide that base 2 is easiest to implement and hey, just let the entire human race try to do calculations base 2. This for a machine that was calculated to do the fucking calculations FOR US. How is that for stupid?
... and no argument at all why it should not have been base 10, such as in use long before since forever. Base 2 should never have been used from the start. Let the machines calculate, it's what they do best.
"And to do this, they have changed a standard unit of measure."
Bullocks. What they did was *revert back* to the standard unit of measure. What when bytes where 7 or 9 bits? Were you complaining back then? Shouldn't we be calling it an octet?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byte
Yeah, sure, maybe they did it because it was commercially advantageous. But this really makes more sense.
"I challenge you to show me an internet connection or even a hard drive that can get anywhere near a gigabit of throughput."
Book a flight to Amsterdam and I'll show you my Intel consumer SSD that runs at 250 MB/s *continuously*. In a cheap laptop with gigabit LAN. Or of course my RAM drive where I unzip movies to.
Besides, there is such a thing called latency, which I like to be low for any kind of application. Speed helps for that.
Don't forget that both WEP and WPA/TKIP are using proprietary algorithms and stream ciphers. Using proprietary crypto has always been a bad thing, and using it with a stream cipher is worse. WEP/WPA failing so fast does not mean that WPA2 using the much safer AES standard (in a security proven mode) should fail as fast.
If you look at the Wikipedia site you can quickly see that TKIP was implemented for easy upgrades of WEP. Seems they took it a bit too easy.
How will current software interact with this chip and be transparent for current applications? Software support in things like IPSec libraries for this hardware is going to be important.
This is Sun. They sell the whole stack - computer, OS, compiler, and so on. You can bet that Sun Java running on Sun Solaris, running on a Sun UltraSPARC will use the coprocessor. The Solaris version of OpenSSL almost certainly will too.
Yes, of course, through their pkcs#11 provider, to be precise. Any application that can use PKCS#11 will be able to use this acceleration. Of course, *some* configuration will likely still have to take place. Java is actually pretty good already, you can simply add a security provider to the top of the list to accelerate any application. OpenSSL can work through PKCS#11 engine nowadays as well.
Is this a response to the Sparc's lack of CPU grunt compared with other processors? If it is then it's going to make Sparc even more expensive relative to the competition.
Not sure how you figure that. Something like the OMAP3530 can decode H.264 in a tiny power envelope compared to something like a Core 2, and yet costs much less. Why? Because it uses dedicated silicon for the decoding. General purpose processors use much more power and, for the same transistor budget run much more slowly than dedicated hardware. If the typical workload for a T2 is very crypto-heavy then adding a dedicated a crypto coprocessor will use less power and give better performance than adding another core. This is why most ARM chips include a number of coprocessors for workloads that are common in handhelds.
Yeah, and don't forget that transistors are pretty cheap compared to going for the latest chip technology/speeds.
It's easier to update software than it is to update silicon or chips. How will this approach and this chip fare in a few years when technology and software has moved on?
But it's slower to replace standards than either, and encryption standards require years of peer review before they are approved.
Yup. Currently crypto instruction sets are pretty useful for specifically AES and hardware random number generation. SHA-1/256 acceleration is also useful of course, but SHA-3 is in the works - the NIST competition will run for at least another two years though. A Montgomery coprocessor (for DH, RSA and EC cryptography) may also be useful, but less than the AES and hash methods since signatures and key agreement are normally not performed as often, even though the time per encrypted byte is much higher.
I would advice CPU manufacturers to only implement a single round at a time though, so it is easier to add rounds and play with the algorithm before the round starts or after it ends. E.g. hash algorithms based on AES should be easier to be constructed this way. Same goes for the SHA-1 and 2 rounds. There is some talk about doubling the number of AES rounds already, and some hash methods in the NIST competition rely on AES rounds.
This history of co-processors for specific jobs has never been a very happy or long-lived one.
Yup, no modern CPUs contain on-chip floating point or vector coprocessors. Well, none except for all of them. And no modern computers contain graphics coprocessors.
Ha, pretty ironic. We'll just forget the FPU because it is completely integrated by now :)
It looks like a way of making up for the inherant lack of grunt on the Sparc platform, so maybe it will reduce encryption costs as far as that platform is concerned.
Not sure what you mean by 'inherent lack of grunt'. For highly parallel workloads (e.g. web serving, lots of database workloads), there isn't much that beats a T2 in terms of throughput at the moment, and noth
I don't know, if I copy my "c:\java" folder at work I end up with literally gigabytes of open source libs, API's etc. all neatly arranged. It would take quite some time to get them back. Some sources are even hard to trace, I've got a open source Java version of the linux/GNU "file" command somewhere, taken from a media server or such. Can't find it anymore. If I would copy that folder I would have some general purpose libs that I compiled myself as well. Yes, I could just take the directory tree and be done with it, but why not copy the folder minus the company libs? And after that a mistake is easy to make.
Not that I would do such a thing, (besides being unable to move this much info from my system anyway), but I could imagine that it is likely that people do such things. Hey, maybe he was even developing the O/S software. Encryption? I am so used to encrypting *any* application that I am sending out of the door that I would probably do it automatically. If only to confuse the company virus scanner.
I don't get it.
How many manufactures are going to build these things. I know they are wildly popular due to cost, but come on, they are all the same.
They all use the same hardware. They all pretty much use the same software. Some look slightly different, maybe.
Although the Asus ones seemed OK, most of the clones seemed crap to me. Only Dell seemed to have made a decent clone. All the others were crap at battery life.
Atom 1.6ghz. 1GB RAM. 160GB HD. Wifi etc... big honking deal.
Hi speed internet and much needed synchronization and GPS are certainly nothing to be sneezed at though. Design and battery life seem great as well.
Maybe they will change something who knows.
I also notice that it has a HDMI port for HD out... um why? Other than you brag you have it I see this as somewhat useless. Will it have video that can handle HD? Likely not. Will it have a HD that you can store lots of HD stuff on? Not really. Will it have a BluRay optical drive? Um No. Is watching HD on a 10 in screen stupid? Likely yes.
Will I prefer my 1920x1080 screen to a 10 inch netbook screen? Hell yes. Will it make it easier to setup a connection compared to VGA or composite? Most likely it will.
No idea what HSDPA is? Though it says (3.5G) which sounds like a cell network protocol. Which is great if it is in your area, of which they likely only cover metro areas or 2% of the actual area...
Speak for yourself. In the Netherlands there's a lot of 3G coverage. It's the one thing missing from my laptop.
Oh yeah and 12 hours battery life? OK at this point EVERYONE knows they all lie through their teeth about battery time, but really do you think we are all stupid now. Have we gotten the the point where the lies don't have to be plausible. All they need now is some disclaimer someplace that says that it was tested with nothing running, the power off, closed, and that is the natural dissipation rate of their battery and includes no usage, or in other words a totally pointless and worthless test of capability.
Yes, we'll have to wait for the previews for that. They won't be able to go under the EEE PC's battery time after promising this. The big question that remains is the screen. How well will the laptop perform when the screen is bright enough to be viewed.
Have you seen the battery life of the thing? Do you know that ION takes a lot of energy /when idling/? That just does not compare. Sorry, no way.
Mine neither, it's a Philips high end screen. Most of the ones now in the store do have VGA. It's a bit of a shame since my fan-less mobo is not supported (I don't count the video out if you don't mind). Of course my laptop has no problems at all, even at 1920x1080 and using lowly Intel integrated video. It works perfectly, at least after I tell the TV that it should leave the signal alone (otherwise it will try and overcompensate movement).
If I compare HDMI cables with all the trouble of analogue signals that I've seen, it's a no brainer. It takes just a second or two trying to start the signal, but otherwise it's perfect.
Yeah, but if you go and put each genetic difference in another league, you would end up with 6 billion leagues. It's bad enough that we require two groups (for the obvious differences would mean that no woman could ever win a physical competition). It's not like it is a huge problem when one "advanced" woman comes a long and messes up only the top spot. Woman still can win and will have a great time trying to break the previous record set by this "abnormal" person.
"I think it has to come down to whether a deviation is grossly abnormal or within what would be considered as normal."
Well, if it is "grossly" abnormal, then good for her.
"Michael Phelps, although physically advantaged to swimming, still has normal body proportions. If his arms or feet were grossly and abnormally long, would it still be considered fair?"
Yes. As long as he is considered human.
She has been treated as a girl from right at birth. She has been checked all her life when she was competing as *IT SAYS RIGHT IN TFA*. Who are we to say she isn't one when she starts to be competitive at the highest level?
She never had any choice in this, as you suggest.
All the other athletes are already using their own "unfair" advantages to be competitive. Now they meet someone who's got that double.
Oh, gods, never imagined I needed a sex change. Well, that cleared it right up, I'm off to the doctor.
It's the way genders are tested at birth and we keep treating persons this way. To exclude her from any competition would create a really bad precedent. It's an easy test, and it's fair. Whatever other genetic or hormonal differences there are are given to her at birth. She probably did not have an easy life as she looked so much as a boy. Now she excels at something and only when she starts to compete at the highest level we are going to say, sorry, but your life as an athlete has ended, since you are not one of us?
Just take her physics into account when you remember the records. And stop taking those lists too seriously. Watch the races and enjoy.
That's just so cool. I assume he did not get any data back from that drive :)
Trackballs that are controlled by thumb are dumb, since the thumb is not meant for moving sideways, it was designed for grabbing things. Since my thumb hurts more easily than my shoulder or wrist, I would never use one.
If you have a glass desk where you have your laptop on for more than 4H a day, it is better than buying a new desk or having to put up with one of those crap mouse pads.
Personally I've used a laser mouse on reflecting surfaces and they seem to do OK. And I don't like glass desks since they cool down my wrists too much.
A good mice lasts forever nowadays, only the wires seem to be wearing out after a while. I've got no trouble spending a bit more on a mice if it means better control (less resistance for RSI).
Either the wires are broken or there is a small piece of hair lodged in the hole with the laser and optical sensor. If the reflecting hair moves around the "camera" will try and track the movement. Mouse pads are brilliant in gathering dust and particles, which is the reason I don't use them any more, I'm using a very smooth desktop instead.
On a more humorous note: especially small curly types of hair seem to be good at lodging themselves in, so this may also be a good indicator of a specific type of internet usage.
It's like a Prius that isn't friendly to the environment.
Each to his own, but I still get into situations where I think of THHGTTG quotes. With all their humor, some of the things said are pretty insightful. The way the stories connect to the real world is what, IMHO, makes the HHGTTG an all time favorite. It is part of a /very/ select number of books that I've read more than twice.
I've got the "more than complete hitchhikers guide" (missing one book) and the comments of the intro are already brilliant. Laying on a field with the world slowly spinning around him. Taking a few baths and a degree in English. Priceless, even now.
You are twisting the conversation. The discussion was that it is much easier to buy junk food for 20 dollars a week than healthy alternatives.
Even I, with a relatively good income, find fruit and veggies quite expensive. E.g. I can buy a rather large bag of generic potato chips, or two pieces of fruit for 1 euro over here. The potato chips will definitely let me feel less hungry than the two pieces of fruit, but I'm pretty sure that the pieces of fruit will have more nutrients.
We've also thrown natural selection right out of the window. That'll have some effects, but I don't know the term. I'm obviously not for some kind of Gataka, but it will be interesting how this is going to play out in the end. One thing is certain, medical science is not advancing fast enough for me to see the end :)
Funny you would only mention A-brands in your reply.