Well, I've noticed it's a common miscomprehension amongst the women and some of the men about exercising and calories but it's affecting women more because the testorone/estrogen thing. I don't think there's nothing sexist about it thought, just the way human body works:)
Some other things came to my mind...
Women has normally less muscle mass than men. Combine that with long exercises with low weights/resistant/etc. You end up with a catabolic state that "burns" muscle mass. Now you have less muscle in your body than in the beginning. This means you are spending less calories. This can lead to a cycle where you burn your muscles away. This is not efficient way to lower weight, because you are wasting the very thing that's eating up those calories, and I don't think it's very healthy either.
Some women also fears that if they lift bigger weights they gain muscles and start looking like female body builders. I can tell that it takes huge amount of effort and training to get big muscles, especially if you are woman because women tend to gain muscles slower than men (because the lower amount of testosterone and bigger amount of estrogen in the body). It won't hurt you to use bigger weights every now and then.
Then there's one more thing that's really bad and which will most definetely lead you to endless cycle. Imagine you have exercised as hell, you've done aerobic (and anaerobic) exercises. You've also been eating less and you've been especially been avoiding salt (it's a common thing at least in Finland to avoid salt, don't know really why). The result is, your body is been depleted of carbohydrates, creatine, ATP and so on. At the same time your weight has stopped decreasing (unfortunately I can't explain the reason for this in English). Now one day you go and eat up a bit something that has salt and sugar. Next thing you know the scales shows that you've gained couple of kilos weight (iiiik!!! fat!!!!), you get shocked and run to the gym to start the cycle all over again (burn muscle, deplete your body's reserves). But really what has happend is that your body has just filled it's carbohydrate and creatine reserves in the muscles and this causes the body to absorb water, which is quite a normal thing.
I think exercise, while it is most definetely good for you, is greatly exaggerated in lowering one's weight. I go work by bike. It takes some 30 min to get there and another 30 back home. This consumes about 330 kilocalories which isn't much if you think that my base calory consumption is something like 2800 kcal/day. There's a downside to exercising also which one have to take account. It raises appetite and if you're not aware of this you easily end up eating more than needed.
So walking couple of kilometers per day isn't going to lower anyone's weight. But it's not going to kill you either;)
Now if someone asks me what is going to lower one's weight if not exercise I got too answer: little bit of muscle mass and eating less than you spend. Muscle mass because muscle consumes calories and bigger muscles consumes more calories (but you don't have to become a body builder or fitness model).
That's simple. Just write "Insert batteries any way you want" on the battery cover. Then write "Any way" on both ends of the battery. This reminds me of any key!
I've worked for 10 years now mainly as a programmer but I've been in the roles of, for example, project manager and support manager. My education is 2 years in business school so basically I should be a sales man.
It's just that you have to know where your flaws are. I couldn't take any programming job that requires heavy math skills like 3D graphics stuff but that's fine, I'm really into such programming anyway. I'm quite capable of writing and desigining business apps though. I've even written kernel network drivers for Windows some years ago.
I don't know what good education could bring to me. I'm in a job now which I like very much and I'm not planning to change. Most likely I'll be in this job until I retire. We have many employees who have worked 30-40 years here and the company is not going away any time soon. And if I ever wanted to swich jobs I think couple of decades of experience compensates that I don't have nice paper from school to wave before the interviewer.
"Needs digital era update" equals "We need law that enables us to track every citizen when ever we feel like it". It's a synonum to "would someone please think about the children" card. And believe me, there's plenty of people who welcome these laws with open arms because "I got nothing to hide. You obviously do, which tells that we need this law". I've seen this many times in our local Finnish news sites.
I bought SonyEricsson P800 back in 2002. I loved the phone and its touchscreen. It was precise enough so that I could use it with my fingernails, even when drunk as a skunk.
Well, democrazy needs gestures (and scapegoats) to elude the electorate (the people). I'm actually thinking about writing an article about this. I got the idea from reading the book Chapterhouse: Dune by Frank Herbert. There's an interesting discussion between Reverend Mother Lucilla and the Great Honored Matre about politics and democrazy.
Technically speaking, no. We vote the parliament, not the cabinet. The parliament elected Kiviniemi to run the cabinet last week. The parliament is perfectly capable to do this with the mandate we gave them back in 2007.
I think both you and TFA are right. But what scares me as a former phone app dev is this (from the fine article)
make calls and send text messages without the mobile user doing anything
Some good amount of Windows malware is explicitly installed by the user. If you make this same mistake in phone and install malware X you might end up with hefty phone bill. The phone OS, no matter if it's Android, Symbian, iOS, Windows or whatever, should at least ask user if it's okay for app X to make the call or send text message.
That is exactly what I'm going to do if I ever get a bigger house where I can dedicate one room for computers and audio/video. Heavy desktop system with couple of large monitors, surround audion system plus video projector just for fun:)
Well, you can speculate what ever you want but the jury and the court has made their decision and that's final. SCO had 7 years time to proove their point and in the end all they got was Darl McBride admitting that they really didn't need the copyrights, which by the way is not constant with his earlier statements.
I would say the case is closed for good. Appeals is going to laugh them out of the court if they ever get there (I think they are going to be in Chapter 7 pretty soon). And I personall am not going to get any deeper into pointless argument about the wording of the APA or the intents of the old or new SCO. I'm just glad that SCO didn't win even when I really don't care much about Linux or GPL.
No, it wasn't any unfortunate mistake on SCO's part. It was deliberate attempt to try to wrestle UNIX copyrights from Novell and/or possibly harass Novell (or more likely IBM) to buy them out. Some say it was a plot masterminded by Microsoft to hurt Linux but I haven't seen any clear evidence on that.
And why I think it was deliberate attempt to get UNIX rights?
SCO asked Novell to join them in a scam to squeeze money out of Linux users by frivolous lawsuits (which would have been blocked by the GPL). Novell refused. Then it was Darl McBride, the CEO of SCO at the time, himself who asked Novell if they could get copyrights from Novell. They needed those to pursue Linux users on their own. When Novell refused again they made a statement in the press that they did own the copyrights even when they very well knew they did not. I mean, why would they ask for the copyrights if they already got them? That makes no sense to me, to the jury or obviously to the judge.
Besides that language is perfectly clear to me and I don't even speak English as my first language. It clearly says that excluded are "All copyrights and trademarks, except for the trademarks UNIX and UnixWare". It's a double negative only on the trademarks. And in fact UNIX trademark was owned by The Open Group if I recall correctly.
Why do you insist others to produce possibly erronous summarization about what takes some five minutes to read yourself? But I'll be so kind to give you a snippet from the decision:
Those "certain assets" are set forth in more detail in Schedule 1.1(a) and do not include the excluded assets set out in Schedule 1.1(b) Under the plain language of the original APA, the copyrights were excluded from the transaction.
You can read APA from Groklaw or google for it. In the APA search for phrases schedule 1.1(a) and schedule 1.1(b). They are too long sections to summarize in sentence or two. But basically what was in tried in court is written in schedule 1.1(b) is part V. Intellectual Property which clearly says "All copyrights and trademarks" were excluded.
What type of crimes to they believe happen (often) on Facebook?
Wrong and possibly "illegal" opinions. Plus pedophiles, or course. They are lurking behind every corner, be it physical or virtual corner. Someone must think about the children!
The police here in Finland has expressed that they would like to have "alarm button to the internet" too (note: the whole internet). They want it because of the children and to prevent racist crimes. These two reasons are absolute bogus! No alarm button can save any children from pedophile. Police has already phone numbers and email addresses where everyone make a contact with them if they see crime happening. And no alarm button can prevent "racist crimes" because Finnish law does not define such a crime! Racism is, while disgusting (at least to me), expression of thought and not a crime per se. Freedom of speech, on the other hand, should be a virtue.
I can almost guess the set of parties you must have casted your vote to during the last elections
Well, go ahead and guess:)
Unfortunately, as the law requires confidentiality from the employees of the telecoms as well as from the officials, they are probably required to include the criticizing Finish site in the List in order to avoid a potential liability.
That doesn't fly. The law permits only the censorship of foreign sites. It's unlawful to censor local sites. The police has exceeded its rights.
Plus that the confidentiality doesn't concern any outsider, just the police. There is no law that requires every Finnish citizen to keep that list secret. Constitution 1.12 permits this, even though Kimmo Sasi (the guy who should watch that laws aren't against constitution) doesn't give rat's ass about constitution.
Bah! In Finland government welcomes any new idea to monitor use with open hands. We have already blacklists which are supposed to keep you away from child porn but it is not working very well and for some curious reason it filters out also local Finnish site criticizing the blacklisting. The law enables only to filter foreign sites.
I think I'm already hearing applauding coming from the seat of the government some 150 km south from here...
Who are you to question Flying Spaghetti Monster, you, you, HERETIC?!
If we measure religions by age then perhaps Australian schools could start to teach about ancient Sumerian gods like Hephilim, Elohim and Annunaki or even older Mesopotamian gods like Ea, Enki and Anu. Who's there to say that Marduk didn't create the earth from the body of Tiamat?!
And no, this is not a stab specially at Christianity.
Could Australian schools teach about flying spaghetti monsters too?
Re:The same can be said for Microsoft's domination
on
Why Apple Is So Sticky
·
· Score: 1
A lot of people have built entire businesses around some combination of apps that are only available for Windows. Unless the app vendors port their apps to another platform (highly unlikely), or a comparable alternative app becomes available, they're locked into Windows, because nothing else will run the apps that their business relies on. In many cases, that may be as simple as Microsoft Outlook, but there are a lot of specialized apps out there.
We would gain absolutely nothing form switching to other platform. In fact it would bring a lot of troubles. We would have to hire a lot of people to our IT department, people who knows that other platform and its quirks. Even if we could get top-of-the-art IT guys here we would still have to educate them to our habits of doing business. It would take years to get everything running smoothly again and what did we gain? Absolutely nothing. What did we lose? Years of work time and plenty of money.
The good news is, Microsoft has dug their own grave.
That would be bad news for many businesses but luckily that is not true. Microsoft is doing quite fine.
I have no idea what Finnish law defines "privacy" or "non-public" as but most every case I've heard on the matter has defined any place that is visible from a public street as being public. Otherwise, ya know, people would be breaking the law just by accidentally taking pictures from the street.
Oh, sorry. I try to elaborate a bit. I ain't a lawyer but I've researched these things a bit and this is how I understand them.
In Finland domestic privacy is a pretty strong thing. Basically interior of apartment or a house is protected by it plus (possible) backyard. Now you don't break the law if you accidentally glance at someone's house and see the couple there performing reproductive actions, but you do break the law if you wont immediately stop looking at them. So the intention of your act and the actions you made to correct yourself is what matters.
Photographing on the other hand is a big no-no. It is not accidental. It is an intentional act. To prevent accidentally filming your neighbours "in the act" it is prohibited to photograph for instance bedroom windows. So you could end up breaking the law if you take pictures of someone's house from the street. The law clearly says that you must not do this. And this is why Google could get in trouble here, allthought I think all they get is a little paternal slap in the wrists and be told "not to do it again".
Now of course if you take your photograph from kilometer distance you've done nothing wrong since no-one is able to distinguish anything from the picture. Courts can use their discretion in these things.
Non-public in this case means any place which is not open for the public. It could mean privately owned house or a warehouse but it doesn't mean like library when it's open for public. Privacy is unfotunately something we are in threat of loosing to the government:(
But, heh, this is fun. When I wrote this comment and thought about what could be considered as breaking domestic peace I realized that I personally have very strong mental inhibitions about breaking domestic peace or peek people. For instance it is not allowed to walk to someone's house which is not locked, but in the country-side it is a common practice to walk right in and yell "howdy" at the door, if you know the people in the house. I just could not do that without feeling guilty:)
Slashdot Mirror
Well, I've noticed it's a common miscomprehension amongst the women and some of the men about exercising and calories but it's affecting women more because the testorone/estrogen thing. I don't think there's nothing sexist about it thought, just the way human body works :)
Some other things came to my mind...
Women has normally less muscle mass than men. Combine that with long exercises with low weights/resistant/etc. You end up with a catabolic state that "burns" muscle mass. Now you have less muscle in your body than in the beginning. This means you are spending less calories. This can lead to a cycle where you burn your muscles away. This is not efficient way to lower weight, because you are wasting the very thing that's eating up those calories, and I don't think it's very healthy either.
Some women also fears that if they lift bigger weights they gain muscles and start looking like female body builders. I can tell that it takes huge amount of effort and training to get big muscles, especially if you are woman because women tend to gain muscles slower than men (because the lower amount of testosterone and bigger amount of estrogen in the body). It won't hurt you to use bigger weights every now and then.
Then there's one more thing that's really bad and which will most definetely lead you to endless cycle. Imagine you have exercised as hell, you've done aerobic (and anaerobic) exercises. You've also been eating less and you've been especially been avoiding salt (it's a common thing at least in Finland to avoid salt, don't know really why). The result is, your body is been depleted of carbohydrates, creatine, ATP and so on. At the same time your weight has stopped decreasing (unfortunately I can't explain the reason for this in English). Now one day you go and eat up a bit something that has salt and sugar. Next thing you know the scales shows that you've gained couple of kilos weight (iiiik!!! fat!!!!), you get shocked and run to the gym to start the cycle all over again (burn muscle, deplete your body's reserves). But really what has happend is that your body has just filled it's carbohydrate and creatine reserves in the muscles and this causes the body to absorb water, which is quite a normal thing.
I think exercise, while it is most definetely good for you, is greatly exaggerated in lowering one's weight. I go work by bike. It takes some 30 min to get there and another 30 back home. This consumes about 330 kilocalories which isn't much if you think that my base calory consumption is something like 2800 kcal/day. There's a downside to exercising also which one have to take account. It raises appetite and if you're not aware of this you easily end up eating more than needed.
So walking couple of kilometers per day isn't going to lower anyone's weight. But it's not going to kill you either ;)
Now if someone asks me what is going to lower one's weight if not exercise I got too answer: little bit of muscle mass and eating less than you spend. Muscle mass because muscle consumes calories and bigger muscles consumes more calories (but you don't have to become a body builder or fitness model).
To us perhaps. To marketing department it is not. To fanboys it most certainly is not!
I can. There's Sql Server Express which totally free of charge and can be used in production.
I can't wait 24 hours! Got to get 12 hour book...
That's simple. Just write "Insert batteries any way you want" on the battery cover. Then write "Any way" on both ends of the battery. This reminds me of any key!
I've worked for 10 years now mainly as a programmer but I've been in the roles of, for example, project manager and support manager. My education is 2 years in business school so basically I should be a sales man.
It's just that you have to know where your flaws are. I couldn't take any programming job that requires heavy math skills like 3D graphics stuff but that's fine, I'm really into such programming anyway. I'm quite capable of writing and desigining business apps though. I've even written kernel network drivers for Windows some years ago.
I don't know what good education could bring to me. I'm in a job now which I like very much and I'm not planning to change. Most likely I'll be in this job until I retire. We have many employees who have worked 30-40 years here and the company is not going away any time soon. And if I ever wanted to swich jobs I think couple of decades of experience compensates that I don't have nice paper from school to wave before the interviewer.
"Needs digital era update" equals "We need law that enables us to track every citizen when ever we feel like it". It's a synonum to "would someone please think about the children" card. And believe me, there's plenty of people who welcome these laws with open arms because "I got nothing to hide. You obviously do, which tells that we need this law". I've seen this many times in our local Finnish news sites.
I bought SonyEricsson P800 back in 2002. I loved the phone and its touchscreen. It was precise enough so that I could use it with my fingernails, even when drunk as a skunk.
Well, democrazy needs gestures (and scapegoats) to elude the electorate (the people). I'm actually thinking about writing an article about this. I got the idea from reading the book Chapterhouse: Dune by Frank Herbert. There's an interesting discussion between Reverend Mother Lucilla and the Great Honored Matre about politics and democrazy.
Technically speaking, no. We vote the parliament, not the cabinet. The parliament elected Kiviniemi to run the cabinet last week. The parliament is perfectly capable to do this with the mandate we gave them back in 2007.
I think both you and TFA are right. But what scares me as a former phone app dev is this (from the fine article)
Some good amount of Windows malware is explicitly installed by the user. If you make this same mistake in phone and install malware X you might end up with hefty phone bill. The phone OS, no matter if it's Android, Symbian, iOS, Windows or whatever, should at least ask user if it's okay for app X to make the call or send text message.
That is exactly what I'm going to do if I ever get a bigger house where I can dedicate one room for computers and audio/video. Heavy desktop system with couple of large monitors, surround audion system plus video projector just for fun :)
Well, you can speculate what ever you want but the jury and the court has made their decision and that's final. SCO had 7 years time to proove their point and in the end all they got was Darl McBride admitting that they really didn't need the copyrights, which by the way is not constant with his earlier statements.
I would say the case is closed for good. Appeals is going to laugh them out of the court if they ever get there (I think they are going to be in Chapter 7 pretty soon). And I personall am not going to get any deeper into pointless argument about the wording of the APA or the intents of the old or new SCO. I'm just glad that SCO didn't win even when I really don't care much about Linux or GPL.
No, it wasn't any unfortunate mistake on SCO's part. It was deliberate attempt to try to wrestle UNIX copyrights from Novell and/or possibly harass Novell (or more likely IBM) to buy them out. Some say it was a plot masterminded by Microsoft to hurt Linux but I haven't seen any clear evidence on that.
And why I think it was deliberate attempt to get UNIX rights?
SCO asked Novell to join them in a scam to squeeze money out of Linux users by frivolous lawsuits (which would have been blocked by the GPL). Novell refused. Then it was Darl McBride, the CEO of SCO at the time, himself who asked Novell if they could get copyrights from Novell. They needed those to pursue Linux users on their own. When Novell refused again they made a statement in the press that they did own the copyrights even when they very well knew they did not. I mean, why would they ask for the copyrights if they already got them? That makes no sense to me, to the jury or obviously to the judge.
Besides that language is perfectly clear to me and I don't even speak English as my first language. It clearly says that excluded are "All copyrights and trademarks, except for the trademarks UNIX and UnixWare". It's a double negative only on the trademarks. And in fact UNIX trademark was owned by The Open Group if I recall correctly.
Why do you insist others to produce possibly erronous summarization about what takes some five minutes to read yourself? But I'll be so kind to give you a snippet from the decision:
You can read APA from Groklaw or google for it. In the APA search for phrases schedule 1.1(a) and schedule 1.1(b). They are too long sections to summarize in sentence or two. But basically what was in tried in court is written in schedule 1.1(b) is part V. Intellectual Property which clearly says "All copyrights and trademarks" were excluded.
Does this suit you better?
It's all in the final verdict. Why don't you go and read it? I just read it and it was pretty clear to me and I'm not even a lawyer or business type.
Wrong and possibly "illegal" opinions. Plus pedophiles, or course. They are lurking behind every corner, be it physical or virtual corner. Someone must think about the children!
The police here in Finland has expressed that they would like to have "alarm button to the internet" too (note: the whole internet). They want it because of the children and to prevent racist crimes. These two reasons are absolute bogus! No alarm button can save any children from pedophile. Police has already phone numbers and email addresses where everyone make a contact with them if they see crime happening. And no alarm button can prevent "racist crimes" because Finnish law does not define such a crime! Racism is, while disgusting (at least to me), expression of thought and not a crime per se. Freedom of speech, on the other hand, should be a virtue.
Well, go ahead and guess :)
That doesn't fly. The law permits only the censorship of foreign sites. It's unlawful to censor local sites. The police has exceeded its rights.
Plus that the confidentiality doesn't concern any outsider, just the police. There is no law that requires every Finnish citizen to keep that list secret. Constitution 1.12 permits this, even though Kimmo Sasi (the guy who should watch that laws aren't against constitution) doesn't give rat's ass about constitution.
Bah! In Finland government welcomes any new idea to monitor use with open hands. We have already blacklists which are supposed to keep you away from child porn but it is not working very well and for some curious reason it filters out also local Finnish site criticizing the blacklisting. The law enables only to filter foreign sites.
I think I'm already hearing applauding coming from the seat of the government some 150 km south from here...
Who are you to question Flying Spaghetti Monster, you, you, HERETIC?!
If we measure religions by age then perhaps Australian schools could start to teach about ancient Sumerian gods like Hephilim, Elohim and Annunaki or even older Mesopotamian gods like Ea, Enki and Anu. Who's there to say that Marduk didn't create the earth from the body of Tiamat?!
And no, this is not a stab specially at Christianity.
Could Australian schools teach about flying spaghetti monsters too?
We would gain absolutely nothing form switching to other platform. In fact it would bring a lot of troubles. We would have to hire a lot of people to our IT department, people who knows that other platform and its quirks. Even if we could get top-of-the-art IT guys here we would still have to educate them to our habits of doing business. It would take years to get everything running smoothly again and what did we gain? Absolutely nothing. What did we lose? Years of work time and plenty of money.
That would be bad news for many businesses but luckily that is not true. Microsoft is doing quite fine.
Yes, you are absolutely right. I just couldn't put it so clearly since, well, I'm Finnish and my mother language ain't English :)
Oh, sorry. I try to elaborate a bit. I ain't a lawyer but I've researched these things a bit and this is how I understand them.
In Finland domestic privacy is a pretty strong thing. Basically interior of apartment or a house is protected by it plus (possible) backyard. Now you don't break the law if you accidentally glance at someone's house and see the couple there performing reproductive actions, but you do break the law if you wont immediately stop looking at them. So the intention of your act and the actions you made to correct yourself is what matters.
Photographing on the other hand is a big no-no. It is not accidental. It is an intentional act. To prevent accidentally filming your neighbours "in the act" it is prohibited to photograph for instance bedroom windows. So you could end up breaking the law if you take pictures of someone's house from the street. The law clearly says that you must not do this. And this is why Google could get in trouble here, allthought I think all they get is a little paternal slap in the wrists and be told "not to do it again".
Now of course if you take your photograph from kilometer distance you've done nothing wrong since no-one is able to distinguish anything from the picture. Courts can use their discretion in these things.
Non-public in this case means any place which is not open for the public. It could mean privately owned house or a warehouse but it doesn't mean like library when it's open for public. Privacy is unfotunately something we are in threat of loosing to the government :(
But, heh, this is fun. When I wrote this comment and thought about what could be considered as breaking domestic peace I realized that I personally have very strong mental inhibitions about breaking domestic peace or peek people. For instance it is not allowed to walk to someone's house which is not locked, but in the country-side it is a common practice to walk right in and yell "howdy" at the door, if you know the people in the house. I just could not do that without feeling guilty :)