The problem is: the RDI is set about 25x too low. They set it at the lowest possible level to prevent rickets in children (assuming children drink as much milk as they did in the 1960s). That's not nearly enough to prevent D3 deficiency in adults.
Milk doesn't provide enough to make a significant contribution. In the US, almost all milk sold commercially has been fortified with 400 IU of D3 per quart.
Your skin will make up to 10,000 IU per day, *if* you get 10-15 minutes of direct sunlight. Your body's ability to do that diminishes with age.
In April, my doctor had me take a 25-hydroxy D3 test (which Blue Cross refused to pay for, BTW), and found that my level was 19.5 ng/mL. Recent studies show that 32 ng/mL is a minimum threshold for good health (Hollis, J Nutr. 2005 Feb; 135(2); 317-22). He prescribed a series of 50,000 IU capsules, one every 4 days.
I might point out that I'm a cyclist--I get plenty of sun in the summer--but I am over 50.
Also, good luck trying to find 50,000 IU D3 capsules in any store.
For the conspiracy-minded among you, there has been a proposal on the table to increase the MDI, but the pharmaceutical companies don't want the recommendation adopted until they have developed some patentable analogues.
Would this also prevent Californians from using genetic markers from verifying their own genealogy? Companies like FamilyTreeDNA provide testing kits; the University of Arizona does the analysis. Those tests only look at a relatively small number of markers, none of which have any medical significance. TFA wasn't clear about the scope of the law in this regard.
Aside from the obvious cooling and interconnect problems (Google for "hairy smoking golfball"), testing and yield are sigificant obstacles. Testing the entire stack is much more difficult than testing an individual chip. Once you bond together a stack of chips, a flaw in any one of them means you have to throw away the whole stack.
The original effort, back in the 70s, was poorly done. The schools wasted a lot of time, money and effort on teaching kids how to do conversions, rather than simply getting everyone familiar with the units. Millions of pocket conversion tables were given out. It was all useless and misguided, because there was no real incentive for people to switch.
Gradually, however, manufacturers have been changing. As another poster has observed, soda bottles are increasingly in liters and half-liters. Same with orange juice. All bicycles, even the ones made in the US, are metric, now.
I work for a major semiconductor manufacturer and we started doing everything metric in the early 80s. All the components in the computer in front of you are designed using metric dimensions, right down to the microscopic transistors. Electrical units (volts, amps, watts, ohms) have always been metric.
I think you're spot on. Cisco may win in court or Apple may simply concede the name and remove it from all packaging. Either way, Cisco makes its point, but ultimately loses the name. The public will always call it an "iPhone", no matter what's printed on the box.
Re:There's not a chance that this is real.
on
Bugged Canadian Coins?
·
· Score: 4, Informative
RFID does not require a processor or battery. Consumer RFID devices for implantation in animals (Pet-ID, HomeAgain) are about the size of a grain of rice.
It also fell apart because they focused all the time, effort and resources on teaching the public how to do conversions, instead of actually switching.
I work for a big semiconductor manufacturer. We made the switch over 20 years ago. One memo, signed by all the VPs, made it happen. Never looked back.
ESPN, which is owned by ABC, regularly advertises on CBS. CBS runs an ad for ESPN's Monday Night Football during the Sunday night game. If NBC were willing to pay for ad time, I think CBS would be willing to take their money, too.
Judging from the replies I've seen here, most slashdot readers don't want the government to do anything (like behavioral profiling) that might have the potential to be effective. That mindset is not unique to this forum. We will continue to see variations of security theatre until the jihadists wipe out a lot more American infidels than they did five years ago.
The article doesn't say what the study group considers an acceptable outcome. I don't understand how they can recommend a process if they don't agree on an objective. Is the sole objective to bring the troops home, and the ensuing genocide just an unfortunate side-effect?
It's a strikingly lame study. It seems to consist of a small number of very specific scenarios, to which the (pre-screened, self-selected) respondents were asked to simply "agree" or "disagree". As the parent observed, there is no consensus in the responses, but, even if there were, it would say more about the methodology of the poll than the opinions of respondents.
It's a really cheap poll, too. I can't imagine that it took more than one person to write the thing, send it out, compile the responses, and write a press release. Probably took about two weeks, total.
Who paid for this, and how much? What's their objective?
They were brilliant, but they weren't unique. You should listen to several episodes of The Goon Show. It becomes clear that Monty Python brought the Goons' concept to television.
I do think that the quality of comedy writing has been in decline. A lot of what we get now is stand-up comic routines stretched into hours--no, years--of sitcom. A poor substitute for imaginative team writing. Another factor is the fact that audiences, as a whole, read very little, so literary allusions don't work any more.
Dr Ellerman argues that the distinction between minds and machines is that while machines (i.e., computers) make excellent symbol manipulation devices, only minds have the additional capacity to ascribe semantics to symbols.
Personally, I don't think that computers as they currently exist bear any resemblance whatsoever to organic brains, but I also don't think there is any fundamental reason why they need to. It's the software, not the hardware, that matters.
It's also unfortunate that AI research has been sidetracked by robotics.
You should get a Squeezebox. I think it meets all your requirements:
* Excellent sound quality. Supports MP3, WMA, FLAC, AAC, WAV and Ogg Vorbis. * Analog, digital and digital/optical outputs. Analog quality is better than any sound card. * The box is absolutely silent--no moving parts. You can keep your server in a different room from your listening area. You can use just about any existing/surplus computer as your server; there's no need to build a fanless machine. * Completely controllable through its remote or from a web-based interface. * Display is visible across the room. * Takes about one second to come out of hibernation.
The downsides: - Form factor--doesn't fit in a rack. - The web-based interface is clunky.
The server software is open source and runs on Linux, Windows and Mac. There is a Squeezebox emulator called SoftSqueeze that you can use to try out the system before you buy anything.
I don't work for Slim Devices--just a satisfied customer.
The seeping generalization that RSI is not due to typing is incorrect.
True, but that's not what the article says. It says that there are a lot of RSIs that are caused by typing, but that carpal tunnel is incorrectly classified as an RSI.
I've never known a vi user with Emacs pinky.
You do now. I had quite a lot of pain in my left pinky last year. I use vim exclusively. The aggravating factors were a) always using the left hand to hold the shift key while typing numeric-row special characters, regardless of whether I was reaching for the character with my left or right hand, b) writing a lot of Perl code, which uses those characters heavily, and c) holding the control key for long periods of time while browsing with ctrl-F and ctrl-B. I had to consciously modify my shift-key and control-key habits to get rid of it.
Moog's low-pass VCF circuit is a brilliant design.
Matched, differential transistor pairs are stacked to form a ladder. The transistors aren't being used for gain, though. The control voltage varies the current through the stack which causes the conductance of the transistors to vary... a lot. The cutoff frequency can be swept through five orders of magnitude by the control voltage alone.
I showed that circuit to quite a few EE profs before I found one who could give an adequate explanation of how it worked.
So what happens when a lot of people all sell their stock in one company at one time and noone is willing to buy it? Can they just not sell?
Assuming these are "at market" orders, the "ask" price will fall until it hits a "bid" price. If there really is no one willing to buy at any price, the price falls to zero, theoretically.
This does happen on thinly-traded stocks. If there are very few buyers (or sellers), the stock is illiquid and its price can fall (or rise) very suddenly.
When a company has liabilities that exceed its revenues and assets, it is typically in bankruptcy and there may be no one willing to buy the shares. The price of the shares can very well fall to zero. At that point, the shareholder is faced with the task of disposing of the worthless shares so that he can claim a capital loss. Google for "worthless stock" for more info.
If I own some stock, and decide I want to sell it, I don't have to look around to find somebody who wants to buy it, do I? Stock isn't bought and sold on ebay, transferred from buyer to seller... It seems that the total amount of owned stock must not be constant. But then, who pays you when you sell stock? If it's not somebody who is buying it from you, then is it the stock exchange? is it the company? who?
The stock is transferred from seller to buyer. In general, it does not go to the exchange or the company. So, yes, it is a lot like eBay and the total amount of owned stock does remain constant, most of the time.
Only by keeping the shares do you have any influence, however infinitesimal, on the governance of the corporation.
Warm temperatures reduce the motility of sperm carrying the X chromosome first, so more male babies are produced. Even higher temperatures are needed to produce infertility. Some primitive cultures have used this effect (soaking in hot water) to produce more male offspring.
Slashdot Mirror
The problem is: the RDI is set about 25x too low. They set it at the lowest possible level to prevent rickets in children (assuming children drink as much milk as they did in the 1960s). That's not nearly enough to prevent D3 deficiency in adults.
Milk doesn't provide enough to make a significant contribution. In the US, almost all milk sold commercially has been fortified with 400 IU of D3 per quart.
Your skin will make up to 10,000 IU per day, *if* you get 10-15 minutes of direct sunlight. Your body's ability to do that diminishes with age.
In April, my doctor had me take a 25-hydroxy D3 test (which Blue Cross refused to pay for, BTW), and found that my level was 19.5 ng/mL. Recent studies show that 32 ng/mL is a minimum threshold for good health (Hollis, J Nutr. 2005 Feb; 135(2); 317-22). He prescribed a series of 50,000 IU capsules, one every 4 days.
I might point out that I'm a cyclist--I get plenty of sun in the summer--but I am over 50.
Also, good luck trying to find 50,000 IU D3 capsules in any store.
Anyway, here are some interesting articles:
http://www.vitamindcouncil.org/
For the conspiracy-minded among you, there has been a proposal on the table to increase the MDI, but the pharmaceutical companies don't want the recommendation adopted until they have developed some patentable analogues.
Unfortunately, robotics has little to nothing in common with AI. All those toys are a diversion.The big breakthrough was the DARPA Grand Challenge.
Soon, what passes for AI will be able to drive across the country, but it still won't be able to read a book--Just like the generation that built it.
Would this also prevent Californians from using genetic markers from verifying their own genealogy? Companies like FamilyTreeDNA provide testing kits; the University of Arizona does the analysis. Those tests only look at a relatively small number of markers, none of which have any medical significance. TFA wasn't clear about the scope of the law in this regard.
Aside from the obvious cooling and interconnect problems (Google for "hairy smoking golfball"), testing and yield are sigificant obstacles. Testing the entire stack is much more difficult than testing an individual chip. Once you bond together a stack of chips, a flaw in any one of them means you have to throw away the whole stack.
The original effort, back in the 70s, was poorly done. The schools wasted a lot of time, money and effort on teaching kids how to do conversions, rather than simply getting everyone familiar with the units. Millions of pocket conversion tables were given out. It was all useless and misguided, because there was no real incentive for people to switch.
Gradually, however, manufacturers have been changing. As another poster has observed, soda bottles are increasingly in liters and half-liters. Same with orange juice. All bicycles, even the ones made in the US, are metric, now.
I work for a major semiconductor manufacturer and we started doing everything metric in the early 80s. All the components in the computer in front of you are designed using metric dimensions, right down to the microscopic transistors. Electrical units (volts, amps, watts, ohms) have always been metric.
I think you're spot on. Cisco may win in court or Apple may simply concede the name and remove it from all packaging. Either way, Cisco makes its point, but ultimately loses the name. The public will always call it an "iPhone", no matter what's printed on the box.
RFID does not require a processor or battery. Consumer RFID devices for
implantation in animals (Pet-ID, HomeAgain) are about the size of a grain
of rice.
It also fell apart because they focused all the time, effort and resources on
teaching the public how to do conversions, instead of actually switching.
I work for a big semiconductor manufacturer. We made the switch over 20 years ago.
One memo, signed by all the VPs, made it happen. Never looked back.
How many did Wired call correctly for 2006?
ESPN, which is owned by ABC, regularly advertises on CBS. CBS runs an ad for ESPN's Monday Night Football during the Sunday night game. If NBC were willing to pay for ad time, I think CBS would be willing to take their money, too.
Judging from the replies I've seen here, most slashdot readers don't want the government to do anything (like behavioral profiling) that might have the potential to be effective. That mindset is not unique to this forum. We will continue to see variations of security theatre until the jihadists wipe out a lot more American infidels than they did five years ago.
The article doesn't say what the study group considers an acceptable outcome. I don't understand how they can recommend a process if they don't agree on an objective. Is the sole objective to bring the troops home, and the ensuing genocide just an unfortunate side-effect?
It's a strikingly lame study. It seems to consist of a small number
of very specific scenarios, to which the (pre-screened, self-selected)
respondents were asked to simply "agree" or "disagree". As the parent
observed, there is no consensus in the responses, but, even if there
were, it would say more about the methodology of the poll than the
opinions of respondents.
It's a really cheap poll, too. I can't imagine that it took more
than one person to write the thing, send it out, compile the responses,
and write a press release. Probably took about two weeks, total.
Who paid for this, and how much? What's their objective?
They were brilliant, but they weren't unique. You should listen to
several episodes of The Goon Show. It becomes clear that Monty Python
brought the Goons' concept to television.
I do think that the quality of comedy writing has been in decline.
A lot of what we get now is stand-up comic routines stretched into
hours--no, years--of sitcom. A poor substitute for imaginative team
writing. Another factor is the fact that audiences, as a whole, read
very little, so literary allusions don't work any more.
But that's exactly what Cyc does.
Personally, I don't think that computers as they currently exist bear any resemblance whatsoever to organic brains, but I also don't think there is any fundamental reason why they need to. It's the software, not the hardware, that matters.
It's also unfortunate that AI research has been sidetracked by robotics.
You should get a Squeezebox. I think it meets all your requirements:
* Excellent sound quality. Supports MP3, WMA, FLAC, AAC, WAV and Ogg Vorbis.
* Analog, digital and digital/optical outputs. Analog quality is better than any sound card.
* The box is absolutely silent--no moving parts. You can keep your server in a different room from your listening area. You can use just about any existing/surplus computer as your server; there's no need to build a fanless machine.
* Completely controllable through its remote or from a web-based interface.
* Display is visible across the room.
* Takes about one second to come out of hibernation.
The downsides:
- Form factor--doesn't fit in a rack.
- The web-based interface is clunky.
The server software is open source and runs on Linux, Windows and Mac. There is a Squeezebox emulator called SoftSqueeze that you can use to try out the system before you buy anything.
I don't work for Slim Devices--just a satisfied customer.
I found it quite interesting, even though the author doesn't seem to know what an adverb is.
True, but that's not what the article says. It says that there are a lot of RSIs that are caused by typing, but that carpal tunnel is incorrectly classified as an RSI.
I've never known a vi user with Emacs pinky.
You do now. I had quite a lot of pain in my left pinky last year. I use vim exclusively. The aggravating factors were a) always using the left hand to hold the shift key while typing numeric-row special characters, regardless of whether I was reaching for the character with my left or right hand, b) writing a lot of Perl code, which uses those characters heavily, and c) holding the control key for long periods of time while browsing with ctrl-F and ctrl-B. I had to consciously modify my shift-key and control-key habits to get rid of it.
It's not analog, it's entirely digital.
You're right, though, it's a beautiful piece of work.
By the same logic, I suppose you believe that San Francisco shouldn't have been rebuilt after 1906.
Moog's low-pass VCF circuit is a brilliant design.
Matched, differential transistor pairs are stacked to form a ladder. The transistors aren't being used for gain, though. The control voltage varies the current through the stack which causes the conductance of the transistors to vary... a lot. The cutoff frequency can be swept through five orders of magnitude by the control voltage alone.
I showed that circuit to quite a few EE profs before I found one who could give an adequate explanation of how it worked.
Sheer genius.
So what happens when a lot of people all sell their stock in one company at one time and noone is willing to buy it? Can they just not sell?
Assuming these are "at market" orders, the "ask" price will fall until it hits a "bid" price. If there really is no one willing to buy at any price, the price falls to zero, theoretically.
This does happen on thinly-traded stocks. If there are very few buyers (or sellers), the stock is illiquid and its price can fall (or rise) very suddenly.
When a company has liabilities that exceed its revenues and assets, it is typically in bankruptcy and there may be no one willing to buy the shares. The price of the shares can very well fall to zero. At that point, the shareholder is faced with the task of disposing of the worthless shares so that he can claim a capital loss. Google for "worthless stock" for more info.
If I own some stock, and decide I want to sell it, I don't have to look around to find somebody who wants to buy it, do I? Stock isn't bought and sold on ebay, transferred from buyer to seller... It seems that the total amount of owned stock must not be constant. But then, who pays you when you sell stock? If it's not somebody who is buying it from you, then is it the stock exchange? is it the company? who?
The stock is transferred from seller to buyer. In general, it does not go to the exchange or the company. So, yes, it is a lot like eBay and the total amount of owned stock does remain constant, most of the time.
Only by keeping the shares do you have any influence, however infinitesimal, on the governance of the corporation.
Warm temperatures reduce the motility of sperm carrying the X chromosome first, so more male babies are produced. Even higher temperatures are needed to produce infertility. Some primitive cultures have used this effect (soaking in hot water) to produce more male offspring.