Yes, a relative of mine was charged with both a criminal suit (dropped) and a civil suit by the SEC. Obviously, I have some bias, but it seems that mismanagement and ineptitude in government extends to pretty much all agencies . . . it was also a striking example of the inequalities afforded by the judicial system with regard to socioeconomic factors.
First, I thought HFCS was between 50%-75% fructose. I'm not sure.
I use Blue Agave Nectar as a sweetener in my cup of tea in the morning. The particular product I use does not indicate the fructose level, however, a formerly used product indicated it is 83% fructose. Both products proclaimed theirs to be low Glycemic Index sweeteners. I don't feel full after having a cup of tea, however, I most certainly do not feel hungry. Although, in the interest of full disclosure, I also dip 4-5 biscuits (Bordeaux cookies made by Pepperidge Farm) in the tea and eat them. In general, I try to avoid HFCS-containing foods as I've found they cause me to feel "yucky" afterwards.
Is the higher level of fructose in the Blue Agave Nectar worrisome? Also, as info, the tea is Yerba Mate, which is often touted as a dieting aid.
Recently I've been using Agave Nectar as sugar substitute for sweetening tea. It has high fructose content (74%-85%) and is quite a bit sweeter than sucrose. The bottle says it has a very low glycemic index, however (19). I am not diabetic but I'm wondering if it is the fructose in HFCS that is the problem. Granted, I consume 1-2 cups of tea per day at most and I add less than a teaspoon of the Agave Nectar in each cup. Otherwise, I am generally soda-free. I don't know about other foods. I don't eat too much canned stuff, but I can't be sure what goes in the food at the cafeteria at work.
I couldn't find much info on the health effects of Agave Nectar but from the (biased, I presume) information on the bottle, it seems to be healthier than sucrose/table sugar.
I think it makes sense to me now. But I'm also drunk. After reading your blog, I think we are on the same page. Duh, we're both on Slashdot so I bet we're of the same ilk anyhow. Anyways, thanks for the clarification.
948a. Definitions In this chapter: (1) UNLAWFUL ENEMY COMBATANT.(A) The term unlawful enemy combatant means (i) a person who has engaged in hostilities or who has purposefully and materially supported hostilities against the United States or its co-belligerents who is not a lawful enemy combatant (including a person who is part of the Taliban, al Qaeda, or associated forces); or (ii) a person who, before, on, or after the date of the enactment of the Military Commissions Act of 2006, has been determined to be an unlawful enemy combatant by a Combatant Status Review Tribunal or another competent tribunal established under the authority of the President or the Secretary of Defense.
So strange. I left work with this story at the top of the front page and when I come back in the next morning, I see only one story has been added since then. All/. could come up with in 16 hours was a single story for the front page?
Normally, dupes are annoying, but this one caused me some trauma!
It is the percent of the top line that results in the bottom line.
Theoretically, you could have a profit margin greater than 100% given tax credits, income from investments, whatever, but it rarely, if ever, happens. Maybe you are thinking of ROI (return on investment)?
I am not intimately familiar with "Selected Ion Flow Tube" however I do have some MS experience and assume the "Selective Ion" part means they are scanning for a finite set of m/z values. MS is a highly sensitive technique but does not have false-positives, so long as you background correct and set a reasonable response threshold. This becomes exceedingly effective with multiple scans (scans can be done on the order of tens of milliseconds)
The problem I see with this implementation, or any implementation that is 'fool-proof' or simply outputs a green light/red light, is that it is selective for pre-determined compounds. All one needs to do to beat it is make slight chemical modifications to explosives, for example a reduced form resulting in m/z that is 2 less than the original explosive compound would evade the detector.
It is really quite naive to say that an MS instrument can be operated with any degree of certainty or accuracy by someone without at least a good undergraduate analytical chemistry course.
Disclaimer: I am a chemist but have limited experience with Mass Spec.
I was going to let rediculous slide but you had to go and use irregardless, too.
Nothing was diculous to begin with, so it can't be diculous again (that is what the prefix re- does, it modifies to indicate something was done again). Ridiculous comes from the base ridicule and, while I haven't checked a dictionary, indicates something is deserving of ridicule.
As far as irregardless, I feel like you guys are starting to plant these on purpose just to piss us GNs off. Regardless has as its base (note I did not use an apostrophe because the possessive of it lacks one while the contraction of "it is" contains one) regard. Saying, "regardless" is akin to saying "without regard to." The prefix ir- indicates negation, as in irregularly (which is, I think, where this confusion comes from as they are two somewhat similar sounding words) which means "not regularly." So if you were to put them together, irregardless would mean "not without regard to," which basically boils down to, "in regard to."
Yes we all understand what you meant. However, when you are out in the real world and are conversing with a well-educated individual, you might do well to keep to good grammar as that person may look on you when you say, "irregardless" much the same way you might look upon someone who says, "I already done told you, it ain't me who done took it."
I've noticed the same. At first I thought it was because I changed my comments preferences but when I set them back to the way they were, no change.
It used to be that browsing at +3, you would get about 10-20% of the total number of comments (e.g. 70-120 comments +3 or higher when total comments = 700). I thought at first (in typical slashdotter fashion) that there was a massive conspiracy of rogue mods who just downmodded at will. But looking at the mod scores, it seems like it's just that there aren't as many mods total or people just don't care for moderating any more (all of a sudden).
Who knows? Maybe we'll have one of those CmdrTaco navel/naval gazing posts again . . . one can only hope.
No, but there are a _number_ of examples that illustrate how poor grammer makes one sound stupid:
"We was going to get some of them new things you calls clothes, but we ain't got no money. We ain't got the brain to even do grammar good, so we is just going to stay uncivilized."
Also, Chuck Norris has Real Ultimate Power and can flip out and kill people with a roundhouse kick to the face.
. . . and now a random fact about Chuck Norris:
Someone once told Chuck Norris that a roundhouse kick is not the best way to kick someone. This has been recorded by historians as the worst mistake ever made.
Slashdot Mirror
I had never received one of these .mp3 spams. Until I read this story. The very next email I received was, sure enough, an .mp3 pump-and-dump.
At least, that's what I assumed. The filename was gloriaestefan.mp3 but I didn't listen (duh), so I can't be certain.
People talk about irony on Slashdot all the time.
Oh, wait . . .
Man it's impossible to say the word wonky and not laugh.
Ummm, manganese dioxide is a metal oxide, not a salt. Salts are ionic.
A metal oxide with a deadly weapon still sounds pretty scary, though.
Yes, a relative of mine was charged with both a criminal suit (dropped) and a civil suit by the SEC. Obviously, I have some bias, but it seems that mismanagement and ineptitude in government extends to pretty much all agencies . . . it was also a striking example of the inequalities afforded by the judicial system with regard to socioeconomic factors.
It appears also that a large seafaring vessel has, under the power of wind, vacated its prior location in port.
First, I thought HFCS was between 50%-75% fructose. I'm not sure.
I use Blue Agave Nectar as a sweetener in my cup of tea in the morning. The particular product I use does not indicate the fructose level, however, a formerly used product indicated it is 83% fructose. Both products proclaimed theirs to be low Glycemic Index sweeteners. I don't feel full after having a cup of tea, however, I most certainly do not feel hungry. Although, in the interest of full disclosure, I also dip 4-5 biscuits (Bordeaux cookies made by Pepperidge Farm) in the tea and eat them. In general, I try to avoid HFCS-containing foods as I've found they cause me to feel "yucky" afterwards.
Is the higher level of fructose in the Blue Agave Nectar worrisome? Also, as info, the tea is Yerba Mate, which is often touted as a dieting aid.
PC Load Letter, what the fuck does that mean?
Is it the fructose that does you in?
Recently I've been using Agave Nectar as sugar substitute for sweetening tea. It has high fructose content (74%-85%) and is quite a bit sweeter than sucrose. The bottle says it has a very low glycemic index, however (19). I am not diabetic but I'm wondering if it is the fructose in HFCS that is the problem. Granted, I consume 1-2 cups of tea per day at most and I add less than a teaspoon of the Agave Nectar in each cup. Otherwise, I am generally soda-free. I don't know about other foods. I don't eat too much canned stuff, but I can't be sure what goes in the food at the cafeteria at work.
I couldn't find much info on the health effects of Agave Nectar but from the (biased, I presume) information on the bottle, it seems to be healthier than sucrose/table sugar.
Thanks in advance if you have any insight.
I think it makes sense to me now. But I'm also drunk. After reading your blog, I think we are on the same page. Duh, we're both on Slashdot so I bet we're of the same ilk anyhow. Anyways, thanks for the clarification.
Isn't that ex post facto punishment?
Thanks for the information but is that relevant? In this case, it is ex post facto punishment, not decriminalization, so ex post facto ought apply.
(ii) a person who, before, on, or after the date of the enactment of the Military Commissions Act of 2006
Also violates Article I, Section 9, ex post facto clause, quite blatantly, in fact. Oh well . . .
So strange. I left work with this story at the top of the front page and when I come back in the next morning, I see only one story has been added since then. All /. could come up with in 16 hours was a single story for the front page?
Normally, dupes are annoying, but this one caused me some trauma!
You had?
Ummm . . .
Profit margin = net income/sales
It is the percent of the top line that results in the bottom line.
Theoretically, you could have a profit margin greater than 100% given tax credits, income from investments, whatever, but it rarely, if ever, happens. Maybe you are thinking of ROI (return on investment)?
I am not intimately familiar with "Selected Ion Flow Tube" however I do have some MS experience and assume the "Selective Ion" part means they are scanning for a finite set of m/z values. MS is a highly sensitive technique but does not have false-positives, so long as you background correct and set a reasonable response threshold. This becomes exceedingly effective with multiple scans (scans can be done on the order of tens of milliseconds)
The problem I see with this implementation, or any implementation that is 'fool-proof' or simply outputs a green light/red light, is that it is selective for pre-determined compounds. All one needs to do to beat it is make slight chemical modifications to explosives, for example a reduced form resulting in m/z that is 2 less than the original explosive compound would evade the detector.
It is really quite naive to say that an MS instrument can be operated with any degree of certainty or accuracy by someone without at least a good undergraduate analytical chemistry course.
Disclaimer: I am a chemist but have limited experience with Mass Spec.
Windows Version:
Poor Folk: I have a problem with my Windows computer.
Help Desk: Reboot.
Debian Version:
Poor Folk: I have a problem with my Debian computer.
Help Desk: apt-get update && apt-get upgrade
I was going to let rediculous slide but you had to go and use irregardless, too.
Nothing was diculous to begin with, so it can't be diculous again (that is what the prefix re- does, it modifies to indicate something was done again). Ridiculous comes from the base ridicule and, while I haven't checked a dictionary, indicates something is deserving of ridicule.
As far as irregardless, I feel like you guys are starting to plant these on purpose just to piss us GNs off. Regardless has as its base (note I did not use an apostrophe because the possessive of it lacks one while the contraction of "it is" contains one) regard. Saying, "regardless" is akin to saying "without regard to." The prefix ir- indicates negation, as in irregularly (which is, I think, where this confusion comes from as they are two somewhat similar sounding words) which means "not regularly." So if you were to put them together, irregardless would mean "not without regard to," which basically boils down to, "in regard to."
Yes we all understand what you meant. However, when you are out in the real world and are conversing with a well-educated individual, you might do well to keep to good grammar as that person may look on you when you say, "irregardless" much the same way you might look upon someone who says, "I already done told you, it ain't me who done took it."
It's doubly bad
You misspelled doubleplusungood.
I've noticed the same. At first I thought it was because I changed my comments preferences but when I set them back to the way they were, no change.
It used to be that browsing at +3, you would get about 10-20% of the total number of comments (e.g. 70-120 comments +3 or higher when total comments = 700). I thought at first (in typical slashdotter fashion) that there was a massive conspiracy of rogue mods who just downmodded at will. But looking at the mod scores, it seems like it's just that there aren't as many mods total or people just don't care for moderating any more (all of a sudden).
Who knows? Maybe we'll have one of those CmdrTaco navel/naval gazing posts again . . . one can only hope.
No, but there are a _number_ of examples that illustrate how poor grammer makes one sound stupid:
"We was going to get some of them new things you calls clothes, but we ain't got no money. We ain't got the brain to even do grammar good, so we is just going to stay uncivilized."
Why would Time Warner be concerned about Verizon going out of business?
And what about radio and TV censorship of, for example, Howard Stern?
Though, if we haven't all figured out by now that politicians are two-faced, then we're dumber than we let on.
Also, Chuck Norris has Real Ultimate Power and can flip out and kill people with a roundhouse kick to the face.
. . . and now a random fact about Chuck Norris:
Someone once told Chuck Norris that a roundhouse kick is not the best way to kick someone. This has been recorded by historians as the worst mistake ever made.