War, on the other hand, serves no creative purpose, but only destroys. I would ask you how we can continue to justify several different military actions during a recession.
Its not politically correct nor a popular notion, but massive technology and societal improvements are the direct result of war. To deny this is to admit one doesn't know history. And contrary to your assertion, war is frequently fueled by massive levels of creativity. Almost everything you take for granted in modern life, either directly or indirectly, can be attributed to war.
which doesn't mean it would be better to continue using that proven technology.
Exactly. And that ignores the fact that material science and electronics have come a long, long way since the 1960s. What can be created to provide the same functionality can now be built for a fraction of the size of weight of what was required during the 1960s. The reason satellites are not getting much, much smaller and lighter is because they are being packed full of ever increasing functionality, including more fuel and more orbital time.
The simple fact is, unless we are going back to the moon or plan a trip to mars, we simply don't require the lift capability provided by the Saturn V. And when we do, its likely we can make due to multiple, cheaper, smaller rockets.
If the price listed on the SpaceX website ($125M) is accurate, "we" are making progress, if by "we" you mean the people who actually work on this stuff rather than posting on Slashdot. Saturn V launches cost in the hundreds of millions each, in 1970 dollars.
Someone above calculated the Saturn V launch costs, adjusted for inflation, is roughly $1.1 billion per launch. Even if the $125M per launch number is off by a factor of two, that means they can still launch four rockets for everyone one Saturn V. That provides for what, a 4x-8x improvement in efficiency? So yes, that's a big step forward, even if it takes multiple rockets to achieve what previously could be done with a single Saturn V launch.
Urban legends aside, NASA did not throw the plans for the Saturn V [CC] away.
Revisions to urban legends aside, most of the expertise to easily leverage the Saturn V designs have long since left NASA and/or died. And what those plans fail to account for, Saturn V was designed in such a way where it was common for revisions to be made on the actual product and designs were changed later. As a result, its acknowledged, a modern Saturn V is very likely to differ from the original Saturn Vs which previously flew. Specifically because modern fixes to the elements which are unknowingly broken in the those designs are very likely to find different solutions given different sets of constraints and minds.
So technically, yes, we have plans for something called a Saturn V. And yet, we have MOST of the plans for what actually flew.
I honestly don't know if you're trolling, ignorant, or being overly pedantic.
There isn't much scientific evidence about what kind of diet is "healthy."
How in the hell did you come to that conclusion. Studies over the last two decades alone very clearly show what is "healthy"; defined as good health and longer life in better health. Needless to say, those diets are extremely unpopular. Furthermore, studies dating back over the last several hundred years very clearly indicate what is unhealthy. So while we can't authoritatively say, eating x, y, and z will absolutely make you healthy, we absolutely can say, in general, a healthy diet looks like x. But its not like we don't know and acknowledge genetic variance plays a big role here.
But there were many studies (some of them randomized prospective trials) starting in the 1970s, and going on for long stretches of time, that compared *healthy* people eating low-cholesterol and high-cholesterol diet. (One of them was the MRFIT trial, if you want to look it up.) For people without heart disease, there was no difference in the death rates between the two groups.
If anyone knows of a scientific study that shows *healthy* people had better health outcomes long-term on one particular diet compared to a different diet, I'd like to know what it is.
You're conflating several things. Man, I'm using that word a lot today. The conflation is the fact you are specifically pulling out sub-segments of the population to hold against the average. Many studies, for decades now, are attempting to better address the issue in more granularity but much of that is only possible with broader genetic studies and understanding of those genetics are it relates to both health and nutrient consumption.
So as I said above, we absolutely, for the broad population, know what an unhealthy diet looks like. Which, that alone is of great benefit. Furthermore, for the broadest of population, we know what a good diet consists of. And really, where this differs is typically about foods which fall outside of what he know is healthy or based on what we know bad foods are.
So yes, being absolutely pedantic, for every specific person, we can not authoritatively say, this is absolutely this most healthy diet for you. Just the same, on average, we can say a healthy diet should look something like this and we can tweak it to better reflect your health needs beyond that. But even more so, we absolutely do know, in general, what a bad diet looks like. That does leave lots of great area and perhaps even some overlap between the extremes, but even with that, the general picture is clear enough such that a path can be followed to provide for better overall health.
In other words, you're both completely fucking stupid and lazy and you are unreasonably demanding I do your homework so you can then ignoring it yet again proving you're both an idiot and a troll. Haha, jokes on me. Seriously, how stupid are you?
Seriously, get off your stupid, pathetic, lazy ass, and go research for yourself. I'll be here when you want to apologize.
When all you have is conflated bullshit, isn't that a good clue that even if you don't want to take my word for it, you have no fucking idea what you're talking about. Seriously, don't want to believe me, GREAT! But get off your stupid, lazy ass and bother to learn something, anything, so as to hold a legitimate opinion rather than barf up the same, factually wrong, bullshit, which is constantly pushed by morons in the public and media alike.
The main point is, most people on slashdot have three views. Two of which, which is sadly the majority, are factually wrong. That doesn't mean others, such as myself have it all figured out, but at least I've gotten off my lazy ass and made an attempt to educate myself on what's really going on rather than towing the party line of bullshit and lies and attacking others simply because you want to believe the bullshit and ignore reality.
Seriously, if you spend much time actually investigating for yourself, regardless of what you currently believe, you'll quickly find almost everything you believe today is full shit. You may not ultimately draw the same conclusions I have, but you will at least understand your current views are factually invalid.
So stop pretending you know what you fuck you're talking about, pull your head from your ass and understand, its extremely difficult to actually understand the REAL facts about these things unless you're willing to do a lot of digging for yourself and crosscheck with both the right and left. I do that! Do you? Since we're having this exchange, very clearly you are not.
Says the person who is ignorant of what's around them and clearly is such a loser, with no life, they only have trolling in hopes to hide their own sad existence from themselves.
Sorry, but underscoring my learned status, at the expense of your own, is oh so such a truly sad form of trolling. The fact this didn't occur to you until you posted means you actually do have my pity.
Even worse is that you statements seem to imply you believe everything you read, else there exists no reason to make such accusations of me. Again, the fact you are so stupid and gullible means you have my pity. Seriously.
Its also worth pointing out, people can nutritionally stave to death despite having a full stomach. Furthermore, diets which are high in vegetable matter and fibers are frequently associated with distended stomachs and poor nutrition. Its why you frequently see pot bellies on staving people.
Furthermore, for people who are on government funds, I whole heatedly believe they should be extremely restricted in the foods they can purchase with those funds. It should only allow generics and then, only very specific items such as beans, wheat bread, rice, vegetables, fruits, nuts, fish, pickles, chicken, pork (no red meats), so on and so on. Absolutely no sugary snacks like cookies, twinkies, sugar waters (including sodas, most liquids labels as juice - which might have 1% juice), etc. Additionally, processed foods such as sausages, hot dogs, spam, tv dinners, meal in a bag, fish sticks, etc., absolutely should not be funded by government assistance.
I've literally argued with others on slashdot before who hold the position that eating nutritionally sound it not financially viable for most. The truth is, most people would rather eat a twinkie and wash it down with sugar water than eat beans, rice, ham, and some greens.
Just because you're losing weight doesn't mean you're eating a healthy diet. Consuming inordinately large amounts of protein and fat is not good for your kidneys and liver.
This can't be stressed enough. Years ago I heard a story of a many suing because of heart and kidney failure directly caused by following the Atkins diet. The funny thing is, the case was thrown out because the man also happened to be an idiot. He was eating something like salami and cheese cake (sorry, may not be exact, but its close), per the Atkins diet for every meal. He did, in fact, lose weight, but it blew out his heart and kidneys.
The judge threw out the case on the basis that he did not find it believable that in this day and age anyone would believe eating a diet consisting solely of those foods were eating a healthy diet. Furthermore, the diet does not advocate only eating those foods so the suit was considered merit-less. Regardless, your point remains. Losing weight is absolutely not the same thing as losing weight in a healthy manner. Atkins is frequently the antithesis of a healthy diet.
Once object code is being distributed to end users who are not developers, and source code is not being distributed to those same end users, then it is closed source.
Sorry, stupidity alert.
Please bother to go learn something about reality before you post ignorant stupidity again. Please go learn the difference between a development process and a licensing model.
Unless you have proof Google has completely changed the licensing model and source code policies, for what they are developing behind closed doors, you are, in fact, a complete fucking idiot spewing lies and baseless propaganda.
I don't credit that for the weight loss (unless you are unemployed you'll never exercise enough to lose weight without also reducing your caloric intake) but it certainly made me feel better about myself.
Actually, exercise is and always will be the first and foremost critical component to sustainable weight loss. Even if you hadn't changed your diet, the exercise alone would likely have resulted in less additional weight gain or a very slow and steady weight loss.
Ultimately, the primary reason people fail is because they diet, as in extremely restricted consumption of good, rather than live with a healthy diet (as in a broad and balanced consumption of foods). Those are two completely different concepts.
Any dietary habit which does not include the full spectrum of foods (which even includes desserts), is a diet and an path to absolutely failure for the vast majority of people. Moderation and exercise is everything. Period.
The second biggest issue people consistently have is they honestly have no conception of what it is they are consuming. I can't tell you have many extremely fat people I've spoken with who sincerely insist they are eating reasonable portions and healthy foods to discover nothing could be farther from the truth. Sadly, a fair number of these people tell me this while they push cake down their throat followed by a sip from their large glass of port wine. I've literally had to fight the need to laugh at them. And this is far, far more common than people realize.
Portion sizes are a major issue in America. As is hydration confusion.
Simple fact is, the human body easily and frequently confuses hunger for thirst. The simple fact is, the MAJORITY of Americans are slightly to moderately dehydrated. This means a large number of Americans are eating to resolve thirst.
Portions are another area where Americans frequently get it completely wrong. Open your hand and spread your fingers. You should eat twice that much in leafy greens at least twice daily. Notice that's leafy greens and not just green or vegetables. Now make a fist. That's the largest red meat portion you should consume in a single meal. You can have twice that from non-red meats.
Also, a large number of idiots, no thanks to idiots like Kessler (IIRC) at the FDA (years ago), honestly believe vitamins are of no use to anyone in the Western world. The simple fact is, anyone who believes this is factually and extremely well documented to be wrong. Even worse, contrary to popular myth, most Americans are NOT receiving the full range of RDA allowances of all nutrients. As such, almost all Americans benefit from the consumption of a multivitamin. Seriously, go learn how you're suppose to get your RDA, every day. Most most Americans its not only financially nonviable, its simply not practical. So unless your doctor specifically tells you to not take vitamins, you absolutely should be consuming a multivitamin.
As another hint, start every meal with the consumption of 8-12 ounces of water before you begin eating. This ensures you're not eating to make up for being thirsty. Lastly, end each meal with the consumption of 8-12 ounces of water. Throughout your meal, have a sip with every bite from another 8-12 ounces of water. If you feel painfully full at the end of your meal (including fluids), you've eaten too much and should consume less the next meal. Furthermore, you should not consider desserts to be part of your meal. Only consume your dessert after you've completed the above ritual.
Another tidbit, contrary to popular dieting habits, potatoes, when consumed in moderation (remember, moderation is key), are actually excellent sources of nutrients, complex sugars, and fiber (yes, that means eating the outside - don't peel them). They should only be consumed at a baked potato. And when baked, make sure you stop cooking when done. Do not over cook! Do not fry them. Do not boil them. And absolutely never ever consume instant potatoes; which is more accurately describ
I don't know about now, but at least in 2007 60% of Iraqis thought that attacks on US forces were justified
That has nothing to do with the topic at hand. Such conflation is one of the biggest reasons why so many idiots have an opinion, which completely ignores its a baseless, ignorant opinion.
As I very clearly said, they view the US as a necessary evil. Please take the time to actually understand what that means. That does not in any way mean they don't ultimately want the US to leave or that they believe the US to be their best buddy.
Furthermore, unless the study very clearly breaks down the regions and religious affiliation in which the study was conducted, its literally a biases and useless study.
Almost any dictator is better than hundreds of thousands of dead people
Yet more propaganda but the idiots of the world. The reality is, you have no fucking clue what the death rates were before the US invaded Iraq. Here's a hint, the death toll is LOWER now than it was before the US invaded.
I don't think adults are more logical thinkers than kids or more immune to it necessarily, they just have more experience and recognition/fear of some type of consequences.
All studies very clearly show, on average, people under the age of 25 or so, absolutely have less ability to logically think. Literally, people under the age of 25 or so, are mentally impaired compared to older adults. Furthermore, the younger they are, the less logically they can perceive the world. This is, in part, why many would like to see the drinking age raised to twenty five.
This is why parents who allow their children to make adult decisions are failures as parents. Statistically, the vast majority of children will fail at making the most basic of logically sound, adult decision; especially when its in conflict with instant gratification. Its not the children's fault. After all, most children are factually, biochemically, retarded. Expecting them to reliably make logical conclusions is simply not realistic.
Now then, to be absolutely clear, given that this is slashdot, that doesn't mean all children are incapable of making valid logical conclusions. It means the vast majority are incapable or consistently doing so.
Yeah, the average person that sees Batman might think it's silly, but then someone can watch kick-ass and think "Maybe vigilantism really is okay" or something like that.
That's exactly right. And that's why most slashdotters are too stupid to understand the complexities of reality. The simple fact is, people don't see violence and flip a switch and say, "violence good." Rather, it subtlety subverts their morale compass. Children with a strong morale center can withstand considerable pressures to deviate. But then again, exceedingly few people have a strong morale compass. And then on the other side, those who are of a weak mind or how no morale centering in their life, find it can become a powerful, if not overwhelming pull. More often than not, violence is presented as a fast form of conflict resolution, a means to obtain respect (frequently confused with fear), and an endorphin fed form of instant gratification.
The real problem is, far, far, far too many fail to understand the subseptable numbers in society is far, far, far larger than they're willing to admit; as supported by an overwhelming number of studies over many decades. Hell, its trivially easy to find slashdotters who very clearly lack any form of morale compass and yet these walking exemplars absolutely refuse to acknowledge the people walk amongst us and sure as hell don't even see themselves as an example. Hell, the number of slashdotters who truly believe its not a crime unless you get caught is staggering; especially if we're talking about themselves. Hell, these walking contradictions will openly argue they are not criminals just because they wish it to be so.
What does any of this have to do with the US thinking it has the right to act as world policeman?
Says the person who has a home, as he curls up with a full stomach, a book, a fire place, and his dog at his feet.
Contrary to ignorance such as your own, and contrary to the massive bullshit spewed left and right, the majority of the population in both Iraq and Afghanistan both want the US there. Yes, the US is viewed as a necessary evil. But believing no one wants us there except oil companies is to be an idiot. People seem to be in a hurry to ignore reality so as to substitute their own.
The simple fact is, the world is likely to be a far, better, safer place for everyone exactly because of more recent middle eastern involvement by the US. And while idiots hate to admit it, much of the middle east owes a thank you to GWB. I think the only real surprise here is it happened everywhere else but Iran.
They are not mutually exclusive. The fact such obvious statements of facts are constantly required to be thrown at piracy morons only continues to underscore the general idiocy and lack of education and knowledge of the pro-piracy crowd.
The simple fact is, you can look around everywhere and see real harm and damage done to companies and individuals from piracy. Period. End of discussion. The simple fact is, hundreds of years of economics prove studies like this are full of shit. The simple fact is, pirates latch on to any propaganda, regardless of who un-authoritative it is, and how un-vetted the material, and promote it as fact because it props up their lies and propaganda, all the while painfully going out of their way to ignore hundreds of years of study and even newer studies which validate they are full of shit. But you don't hear things like facts and reality being discussed. You only ever hear lies and propaganda as shaped by pirates on sites like slashdot.
The simply fact is, I've never met a pirate who wasn't a lying, hypocritical, idiotic, person. Literally. Zero exceptions to date. Worse, they almost always delude themselves into believing their own irrational, fictional, bullshit. Which ultimately means, you can't fix stupid. Welcome to the self-entitled generation.
Nuclear energy keeps the entire's world energy supply cheap. You have cheap energy exactly because there is cheap nuclear power.
You're ignorantly forgetting ALL energy is subsidized. Anti-nuke morons only want to point out the nuclear subsidies, which largely only exist and are only required because of nuclear morons.
Until Google says its closed, or refuses to release at some point down the road, its open. That's reality. Again, you're purposely conflating closed development with closed source. They are two completely different things. The fact you're purposely attempting to conflate validates you're an idiot.
To some people $0.99 for one song is not reasonable at all.
Then they are not living in the demographic to which I was specifically referring. Which ultimately means, what are we talking about - as its not addressing my statement.
I'm sorry but what!? Music in western society is priced way outside its actual value. Even more so now that the Label are trying to sell you a limited use license instead of a personal copy. Remember, a music CD at retail is roughly the equivalent of a weeks worth of food.
What the hell are you talking about? Reality completely contradicts everything you said. Ultimately that's the problem with these exchanges. Pirates live in delusion and you are can't argue with stupid. For all western countries I can think of, certainly the majority of population, a CD costs nowhere near a weeks worth of food and completely ignores singles are the majority of purchases; which can frequently be had for less than a dollar.
Actually, studies like this contradict multitudes of studies which completely contradict this study. Not to mention, basic economics even contradict this study. So the onus of proof is most definitely not on me. They have an extremely higher burden from proof to overcome the overwhelming evidence they are full of shit.
I agree with your over all point in generic economics but it also glosses over some very serious issues. Larger sales can also mean higher overhead in support and distribution as well as liability. So while the raw numbers may make sense, once the final numbers are tabulated, lower market penetration at high market price can frequently yield best profit potential (more profit for less work; thusly allow for more expansion and growth and higher paid jobs). Furthermore, this in turn typically has the effect of creating multi-tiered markets whereby they will come in at a lower price point; thusly expanding the market and encouraging yet additional competition.
In this case, pirates very successfully erode the primary markets and all but destroyed the second and especially third tier markets. Which further underscores, this absolutely is not an economic failure. This is a societal failure, which BTW, many studies have long, long shown, in that lots of people now believe crime is not criminal so long as they can convince themselves, true or otherwise, no one is hurt. And that if they want something, regardless of the cost and the size of their blinders, they'll steal it because, while they've done nothing to earn it, they deserve it. Literally, we now have the self-entitled generation.
This is, of course, why you see so many pirates constantly parroting the same completely false propaganda over and over again. Its because they continue to reassure themselves and attempt to recruit others, which in turn acts as a form of self re-assurance, they are not criminals. This is very important to sustain the delusion else it means admitting that yes, in fact you are a criminal. And most people simply don't want to admit they are, in fact, criminals. Which brings us back around again - its a societal failure - not an economic failure.
Slashdot Mirror
War, on the other hand, serves no creative purpose, but only destroys. I would ask you how we can continue to justify several different military actions during a recession.
Its not politically correct nor a popular notion, but massive technology and societal improvements are the direct result of war. To deny this is to admit one doesn't know history. And contrary to your assertion, war is frequently fueled by massive levels of creativity. Almost everything you take for granted in modern life, either directly or indirectly, can be attributed to war.
which doesn't mean it would be better to continue using that proven technology.
Exactly. And that ignores the fact that material science and electronics have come a long, long way since the 1960s. What can be created to provide the same functionality can now be built for a fraction of the size of weight of what was required during the 1960s. The reason satellites are not getting much, much smaller and lighter is because they are being packed full of ever increasing functionality, including more fuel and more orbital time.
The simple fact is, unless we are going back to the moon or plan a trip to mars, we simply don't require the lift capability provided by the Saturn V. And when we do, its likely we can make due to multiple, cheaper, smaller rockets.
No, we're talking about reality. In reality, unlike in theory,
Right there you just lost many a slashdot reader. I'll say no more else their heads may explode.
If the price listed on the SpaceX website ($125M) is accurate, "we" are making progress, if by "we" you mean the people who actually work on this stuff rather than posting on Slashdot. Saturn V launches cost in the hundreds of millions each, in 1970 dollars.
Someone above calculated the Saturn V launch costs, adjusted for inflation, is roughly $1.1 billion per launch. Even if the $125M per launch number is off by a factor of two, that means they can still launch four rockets for everyone one Saturn V. That provides for what, a 4x-8x improvement in efficiency? So yes, that's a big step forward, even if it takes multiple rockets to achieve what previously could be done with a single Saturn V launch.
Urban legends aside, NASA did not throw the plans for the Saturn V [CC] away.
Revisions to urban legends aside, most of the expertise to easily leverage the Saturn V designs have long since left NASA and/or died. And what those plans fail to account for, Saturn V was designed in such a way where it was common for revisions to be made on the actual product and designs were changed later. As a result, its acknowledged, a modern Saturn V is very likely to differ from the original Saturn Vs which previously flew. Specifically because modern fixes to the elements which are unknowingly broken in the those designs are very likely to find different solutions given different sets of constraints and minds.
So technically, yes, we have plans for something called a Saturn V. And yet, we have MOST of the plans for what actually flew.
I honestly don't know if you're trolling, ignorant, or being overly pedantic.
There isn't much scientific evidence about what kind of diet is "healthy."
How in the hell did you come to that conclusion. Studies over the last two decades alone very clearly show what is "healthy"; defined as good health and longer life in better health. Needless to say, those diets are extremely unpopular. Furthermore, studies dating back over the last several hundred years very clearly indicate what is unhealthy. So while we can't authoritatively say, eating x, y, and z will absolutely make you healthy, we absolutely can say, in general, a healthy diet looks like x. But its not like we don't know and acknowledge genetic variance plays a big role here.
But there were many studies (some of them randomized prospective trials) starting in the 1970s, and going on for long stretches of time, that compared *healthy* people eating low-cholesterol and high-cholesterol diet. (One of them was the MRFIT trial, if you want to look it up.) For people without heart disease, there was no difference in the death rates between the two groups.
If anyone knows of a scientific study that shows *healthy* people had better health outcomes long-term on one particular diet compared to a different diet, I'd like to know what it is.
You're conflating several things. Man, I'm using that word a lot today. The conflation is the fact you are specifically pulling out sub-segments of the population to hold against the average. Many studies, for decades now, are attempting to better address the issue in more granularity but much of that is only possible with broader genetic studies and understanding of those genetics are it relates to both health and nutrient consumption.
So as I said above, we absolutely, for the broad population, know what an unhealthy diet looks like. Which, that alone is of great benefit. Furthermore, for the broadest of population, we know what a good diet consists of. And really, where this differs is typically about foods which fall outside of what he know is healthy or based on what we know bad foods are.
So yes, being absolutely pedantic, for every specific person, we can not authoritatively say, this is absolutely this most healthy diet for you. Just the same, on average, we can say a healthy diet should look something like this and we can tweak it to better reflect your health needs beyond that. But even more so, we absolutely do know, in general, what a bad diet looks like. That does leave lots of great area and perhaps even some overlap between the extremes, but even with that, the general picture is clear enough such that a path can be followed to provide for better overall health.
In other words, you're both completely fucking stupid and lazy and you are unreasonably demanding I do your homework so you can then ignoring it yet again proving you're both an idiot and a troll. Haha, jokes on me. Seriously, how stupid are you?
Seriously, get off your stupid, pathetic, lazy ass, and go research for yourself. I'll be here when you want to apologize.
Fucking idiots.
More conflation and bullshit.
When all you have is conflated bullshit, isn't that a good clue that even if you don't want to take my word for it, you have no fucking idea what you're talking about. Seriously, don't want to believe me, GREAT! But get off your stupid, lazy ass and bother to learn something, anything, so as to hold a legitimate opinion rather than barf up the same, factually wrong, bullshit, which is constantly pushed by morons in the public and media alike.
The main point is, most people on slashdot have three views. Two of which, which is sadly the majority, are factually wrong. That doesn't mean others, such as myself have it all figured out, but at least I've gotten off my lazy ass and made an attempt to educate myself on what's really going on rather than towing the party line of bullshit and lies and attacking others simply because you want to believe the bullshit and ignore reality.
Seriously, if you spend much time actually investigating for yourself, regardless of what you currently believe, you'll quickly find almost everything you believe today is full shit. You may not ultimately draw the same conclusions I have, but you will at least understand your current views are factually invalid.
So stop pretending you know what you fuck you're talking about, pull your head from your ass and understand, its extremely difficult to actually understand the REAL facts about these things unless you're willing to do a lot of digging for yourself and crosscheck with both the right and left. I do that! Do you? Since we're having this exchange, very clearly you are not.
PS. Your life must be so interesting :)
Says the person who is ignorant of what's around them and clearly is such a loser, with no life, they only have trolling in hopes to hide their own sad existence from themselves.
Sorry, but underscoring my learned status, at the expense of your own, is oh so such a truly sad form of trolling. The fact this didn't occur to you until you posted means you actually do have my pity.
Even worse is that you statements seem to imply you believe everything you read, else there exists no reason to make such accusations of me. Again, the fact you are so stupid and gullible means you have my pity. Seriously.
Its also worth pointing out, people can nutritionally stave to death despite having a full stomach. Furthermore, diets which are high in vegetable matter and fibers are frequently associated with distended stomachs and poor nutrition. Its why you frequently see pot bellies on staving people.
Furthermore, for people who are on government funds, I whole heatedly believe they should be extremely restricted in the foods they can purchase with those funds. It should only allow generics and then, only very specific items such as beans, wheat bread, rice, vegetables, fruits, nuts, fish, pickles, chicken, pork (no red meats), so on and so on. Absolutely no sugary snacks like cookies, twinkies, sugar waters (including sodas, most liquids labels as juice - which might have 1% juice), etc. Additionally, processed foods such as sausages, hot dogs, spam, tv dinners, meal in a bag, fish sticks, etc., absolutely should not be funded by government assistance.
I've literally argued with others on slashdot before who hold the position that eating nutritionally sound it not financially viable for most. The truth is, most people would rather eat a twinkie and wash it down with sugar water than eat beans, rice, ham, and some greens.
Just because you're losing weight doesn't mean you're eating a healthy diet. Consuming inordinately large amounts of protein and fat is not good for your kidneys and liver.
This can't be stressed enough. Years ago I heard a story of a many suing because of heart and kidney failure directly caused by following the Atkins diet. The funny thing is, the case was thrown out because the man also happened to be an idiot. He was eating something like salami and cheese cake (sorry, may not be exact, but its close), per the Atkins diet for every meal. He did, in fact, lose weight, but it blew out his heart and kidneys.
The judge threw out the case on the basis that he did not find it believable that in this day and age anyone would believe eating a diet consisting solely of those foods were eating a healthy diet. Furthermore, the diet does not advocate only eating those foods so the suit was considered merit-less. Regardless, your point remains. Losing weight is absolutely not the same thing as losing weight in a healthy manner. Atkins is frequently the antithesis of a healthy diet.
Once object code is being distributed to end users who are not developers, and source code is not being distributed to those same end users, then it is closed source.
Sorry, stupidity alert.
Please bother to go learn something about reality before you post ignorant stupidity again. Please go learn the difference between a development process and a licensing model.
Unless you have proof Google has completely changed the licensing model and source code policies, for what they are developing behind closed doors, you are, in fact, a complete fucking idiot spewing lies and baseless propaganda.
I don't credit that for the weight loss (unless you are unemployed you'll never exercise enough to lose weight without also reducing your caloric intake) but it certainly made me feel better about myself.
Actually, exercise is and always will be the first and foremost critical component to sustainable weight loss. Even if you hadn't changed your diet, the exercise alone would likely have resulted in less additional weight gain or a very slow and steady weight loss.
Ultimately, the primary reason people fail is because they diet, as in extremely restricted consumption of good, rather than live with a healthy diet (as in a broad and balanced consumption of foods). Those are two completely different concepts.
Any dietary habit which does not include the full spectrum of foods (which even includes desserts), is a diet and an path to absolutely failure for the vast majority of people. Moderation and exercise is everything. Period.
The second biggest issue people consistently have is they honestly have no conception of what it is they are consuming. I can't tell you have many extremely fat people I've spoken with who sincerely insist they are eating reasonable portions and healthy foods to discover nothing could be farther from the truth. Sadly, a fair number of these people tell me this while they push cake down their throat followed by a sip from their large glass of port wine. I've literally had to fight the need to laugh at them. And this is far, far more common than people realize.
Portion sizes are a major issue in America. As is hydration confusion.
Simple fact is, the human body easily and frequently confuses hunger for thirst. The simple fact is, the MAJORITY of Americans are slightly to moderately dehydrated. This means a large number of Americans are eating to resolve thirst.
Portions are another area where Americans frequently get it completely wrong. Open your hand and spread your fingers. You should eat twice that much in leafy greens at least twice daily. Notice that's leafy greens and not just green or vegetables. Now make a fist. That's the largest red meat portion you should consume in a single meal. You can have twice that from non-red meats.
Also, a large number of idiots, no thanks to idiots like Kessler (IIRC) at the FDA (years ago), honestly believe vitamins are of no use to anyone in the Western world. The simple fact is, anyone who believes this is factually and extremely well documented to be wrong. Even worse, contrary to popular myth, most Americans are NOT receiving the full range of RDA allowances of all nutrients. As such, almost all Americans benefit from the consumption of a multivitamin. Seriously, go learn how you're suppose to get your RDA, every day. Most most Americans its not only financially nonviable, its simply not practical. So unless your doctor specifically tells you to not take vitamins, you absolutely should be consuming a multivitamin.
As another hint, start every meal with the consumption of 8-12 ounces of water before you begin eating. This ensures you're not eating to make up for being thirsty. Lastly, end each meal with the consumption of 8-12 ounces of water. Throughout your meal, have a sip with every bite from another 8-12 ounces of water. If you feel painfully full at the end of your meal (including fluids), you've eaten too much and should consume less the next meal. Furthermore, you should not consider desserts to be part of your meal. Only consume your dessert after you've completed the above ritual.
Another tidbit, contrary to popular dieting habits, potatoes, when consumed in moderation (remember, moderation is key), are actually excellent sources of nutrients, complex sugars, and fiber (yes, that means eating the outside - don't peel them). They should only be consumed at a baked potato. And when baked, make sure you stop cooking when done. Do not over cook! Do not fry them. Do not boil them. And absolutely never ever consume instant potatoes; which is more accurately describ
I don't know about now, but at least in 2007 60% of Iraqis thought that attacks on US forces were justified
That has nothing to do with the topic at hand. Such conflation is one of the biggest reasons why so many idiots have an opinion, which completely ignores its a baseless, ignorant opinion.
As I very clearly said, they view the US as a necessary evil. Please take the time to actually understand what that means. That does not in any way mean they don't ultimately want the US to leave or that they believe the US to be their best buddy.
Furthermore, unless the study very clearly breaks down the regions and religious affiliation in which the study was conducted, its literally a biases and useless study.
Almost any dictator is better than hundreds of thousands of dead people
Yet more propaganda but the idiots of the world. The reality is, you have no fucking clue what the death rates were before the US invaded Iraq. Here's a hint, the death toll is LOWER now than it was before the US invaded.
Fucking idiots.
I don't think adults are more logical thinkers than kids or more immune to it necessarily, they just have more experience and recognition/fear of some type of consequences.
All studies very clearly show, on average, people under the age of 25 or so, absolutely have less ability to logically think. Literally, people under the age of 25 or so, are mentally impaired compared to older adults. Furthermore, the younger they are, the less logically they can perceive the world. This is, in part, why many would like to see the drinking age raised to twenty five.
This is why parents who allow their children to make adult decisions are failures as parents. Statistically, the vast majority of children will fail at making the most basic of logically sound, adult decision; especially when its in conflict with instant gratification. Its not the children's fault. After all, most children are factually, biochemically, retarded. Expecting them to reliably make logical conclusions is simply not realistic.
Now then, to be absolutely clear, given that this is slashdot, that doesn't mean all children are incapable of making valid logical conclusions. It means the vast majority are incapable or consistently doing so.
Yeah, the average person that sees Batman might think it's silly, but then someone can watch kick-ass and think "Maybe vigilantism really is okay" or something like that.
That's exactly right. And that's why most slashdotters are too stupid to understand the complexities of reality. The simple fact is, people don't see violence and flip a switch and say, "violence good." Rather, it subtlety subverts their morale compass. Children with a strong morale center can withstand considerable pressures to deviate. But then again, exceedingly few people have a strong morale compass. And then on the other side, those who are of a weak mind or how no morale centering in their life, find it can become a powerful, if not overwhelming pull. More often than not, violence is presented as a fast form of conflict resolution, a means to obtain respect (frequently confused with fear), and an endorphin fed form of instant gratification.
The real problem is, far, far, far too many fail to understand the subseptable numbers in society is far, far, far larger than they're willing to admit; as supported by an overwhelming number of studies over many decades. Hell, its trivially easy to find slashdotters who very clearly lack any form of morale compass and yet these walking exemplars absolutely refuse to acknowledge the people walk amongst us and sure as hell don't even see themselves as an example. Hell, the number of slashdotters who truly believe its not a crime unless you get caught is staggering; especially if we're talking about themselves. Hell, these walking contradictions will openly argue they are not criminals just because they wish it to be so.
What does any of this have to do with the US thinking it has the right to act as world policeman?
Says the person who has a home, as he curls up with a full stomach, a book, a fire place, and his dog at his feet.
Contrary to ignorance such as your own, and contrary to the massive bullshit spewed left and right, the majority of the population in both Iraq and Afghanistan both want the US there. Yes, the US is viewed as a necessary evil. But believing no one wants us there except oil companies is to be an idiot. People seem to be in a hurry to ignore reality so as to substitute their own.
The simple fact is, the world is likely to be a far, better, safer place for everyone exactly because of more recent middle eastern involvement by the US. And while idiots hate to admit it, much of the middle east owes a thank you to GWB. I think the only real surprise here is it happened everywhere else but Iran.
They are not mutually exclusive. The fact such obvious statements of facts are constantly required to be thrown at piracy morons only continues to underscore the general idiocy and lack of education and knowledge of the pro-piracy crowd.
The simple fact is, you can look around everywhere and see real harm and damage done to companies and individuals from piracy. Period. End of discussion. The simple fact is, hundreds of years of economics prove studies like this are full of shit. The simple fact is, pirates latch on to any propaganda, regardless of who un-authoritative it is, and how un-vetted the material, and promote it as fact because it props up their lies and propaganda, all the while painfully going out of their way to ignore hundreds of years of study and even newer studies which validate they are full of shit. But you don't hear things like facts and reality being discussed. You only ever hear lies and propaganda as shaped by pirates on sites like slashdot.
The simply fact is, I've never met a pirate who wasn't a lying, hypocritical, idiotic, person. Literally. Zero exceptions to date. Worse, they almost always delude themselves into believing their own irrational, fictional, bullshit. Which ultimately means, you can't fix stupid. Welcome to the self-entitled generation.
Nuclear energy keeps the entire's world energy supply cheap. You have cheap energy exactly because there is cheap nuclear power.
You're ignorantly forgetting ALL energy is subsidized. Anti-nuke morons only want to point out the nuclear subsidies, which largely only exist and are only required because of nuclear morons.
Android 3.0 is not closed source.
Until it's opened, it's closed.
Until Google says its closed, or refuses to release at some point down the road, its open. That's reality. Again, you're purposely conflating closed development with closed source. They are two completely different things. The fact you're purposely attempting to conflate validates you're an idiot.
To some people $0.99 for one song is not reasonable at all.
Then they are not living in the demographic to which I was specifically referring. Which ultimately means, what are we talking about - as its not addressing my statement.
I'm sorry but what!? Music in western society is priced way outside its actual value. Even more so now that the Label are trying to sell you a limited use license instead of a personal copy. Remember, a music CD at retail is roughly the equivalent of a weeks worth of food.
What the hell are you talking about? Reality completely contradicts everything you said. Ultimately that's the problem with these exchanges. Pirates live in delusion and you are can't argue with stupid. For all western countries I can think of, certainly the majority of population, a CD costs nowhere near a weeks worth of food and completely ignores singles are the majority of purchases; which can frequently be had for less than a dollar.
Actually, studies like this contradict multitudes of studies which completely contradict this study. Not to mention, basic economics even contradict this study. So the onus of proof is most definitely not on me. They have an extremely higher burden from proof to overcome the overwhelming evidence they are full of shit.
I agree with your over all point in generic economics but it also glosses over some very serious issues. Larger sales can also mean higher overhead in support and distribution as well as liability. So while the raw numbers may make sense, once the final numbers are tabulated, lower market penetration at high market price can frequently yield best profit potential (more profit for less work; thusly allow for more expansion and growth and higher paid jobs). Furthermore, this in turn typically has the effect of creating multi-tiered markets whereby they will come in at a lower price point; thusly expanding the market and encouraging yet additional competition.
In this case, pirates very successfully erode the primary markets and all but destroyed the second and especially third tier markets. Which further underscores, this absolutely is not an economic failure. This is a societal failure, which BTW, many studies have long, long shown, in that lots of people now believe crime is not criminal so long as they can convince themselves, true or otherwise, no one is hurt. And that if they want something, regardless of the cost and the size of their blinders, they'll steal it because, while they've done nothing to earn it, they deserve it. Literally, we now have the self-entitled generation.
This is, of course, why you see so many pirates constantly parroting the same completely false propaganda over and over again. Its because they continue to reassure themselves and attempt to recruit others, which in turn acts as a form of self re-assurance, they are not criminals. This is very important to sustain the delusion else it means admitting that yes, in fact you are a criminal. And most people simply don't want to admit they are, in fact, criminals. Which brings us back around again - its a societal failure - not an economic failure.
Exactly! Piracy is a victimless crime, like punching someone in the dark.
That is deeply profound...and funny...and true!