Nobody is arguing that mobility gets tougher for some people as they age. That's not the discussion. The discussion is: Calories In
Prattling on and on about all of the ailments that prevents one from moving only strengthens my original statement. If one is moving less, then one is burning fewer calories. This, the only way to lose weight, is to eat less food. It's quite simple, really.
Put another way, the *type* of calorie matters. If you are obese, the only way to address it is to address the biochemistry, not the math.
No. Fat is not created out of nothing. Fat is created from calories. Biochemistry may influence how many calories are absorbed or burned, but it all still comes down to calories: Calories In Calories Used = Weight Loss. First law of thermodynamics. If you're fat, eat less.
If one is overweight, one needs to eat fewer calories that trigger insulin response.
The laws of physics will always win out over any small factors like insulin response, metabolism, etc. Calories consumed
Anybody who can prove otherwise has also disproven one of the fundamental laws of thermodynamics that govern our known universe.
It's close enough that anybody can choose to eat so that one doesn't get fat.
Besides, if it's a strict measure of the amount of energy in an object as you say, then the calorie count on a package of food can only be too high, anyway.
If the calorie count is too HIGH, that's even MORE reason for a person not to eat that food.
Thus, the calorie count on food packages is more than sufficient.
All semantics aside, If one is overweight (for whatever reason), one needs to eat fewer calories.
You could also eat a neutron star, and you certainly wouldn't get fat, either.
In reality, though, we have those nice labels on all of our foods that show us how many calories we will get by eating whatever the food is. It's not that complicated.
#2 is mostly bullshit. It doesn't matter what you eat, in terms of obesity. It's simple calories in, calories out. I eat tons of bread and starchy foods, and can maintain my weight just fine if my calories in are what they're supposed to be.
By this point, I think people generally understand that Healthcare.gov is to be avoided if at all possible. This system of systems is a monster (reportedly 500 million lines of code at 60-70% completion), and it's probably too big to test -- testing might take longer than it took to write, i.e., the QA death spiral.
I fail to see what a large codebase has to do with end users using or not using it.
The only reason to use the exchange is to get a subsidy. If you are a normal taxpayer who won't qualify for one, go off-exchange.
Why wouldn't somebody want to compare plans and prices available off-exchange with those in the exchange, exactly?
I had never heard of Reactive Programming before, but after reading the article, it seems that Reactive Programming is the same thing as using views, which have been a part of mature RDBMS's for several decades now. Am I missing something obvious?
. It's the lockdown that is the cause of the eminent death of the PC industry. Why buy a general computing device that doesn't let you do general computing? Can't believe Microsoft sold the hardware manufacturers on this shit.
Kid, what in the HELL are you talking about?
You can only do things with Linux if you're willing to devote your life to learning to use the damn thing, and you can't do anything with Apple machines because the OS is locked to the machine. The only OS maker that makes an OS that you can freely (and easily) install on almost any piece of computer hardware on the planet is Microsoft.
Spoken like a true non-business owner. I said it's not a burden, and you call that "fact-free". Either you have no idea what you're talking about, or you find that paying taxes is too difficult for you to figure out.
You say that a child's lemonade stand has similar regulatory burdens as McDonald's. Fuck you. You're an idiot.
Oh, quit with the "regulatory burden" bullshit. It's a TINY burden in exchange for being able to sell to every person in the country. You wouldn't know "regulatory burden" if it hit you in the head. If you're too stupid or too lazy to figure out how to pay the taxes you're supposed to pay, then you're too stupid or lazy to be in business.
When little kids can't even run a lemonade stand in their home's driveway on a summer afternoon any more without dealing with the same regulatory burdens and costs that a McDonald's does, there's something wrong.
You're right. That would suck. What does that have to do with this discussion?
Payroll tax updates are a whopping $180/year. (http://payroll.intuit.com/)
Even if sales tax updates are more expensive, its still not a burden. Probably less than most hosting plans, actually. And, I'll be willing to bet good money that it'll be built right into most major eCommerce platforms as well.
Do you know how small businesses handle payroll taxes now? Do you know how often the rules change? Do you know how much has to be deducted from each person at each time in every different situation? No? Neither do I. That's why small businesses pay a service to take care of all of this. There are also services that will handle all of the sales tax rules, as well. It isn't rocket science.
That's terrible. I'm honestly sorry for you. I guess I live in an awesome place. I can get everything (not just computer shit) I need locally without going to any big box stores or buying online. I simply wouldn't live in a place, that say, had no local computer stores, or no local book stores, etc.
Slashdot Mirror
"Storing Your Encrypted Passwords Offline On a Dedicated Device" = stick them in a USB stick in your pocket.
My solution fulfills all of the requirements the easiest, the cheapest, and the most reliably.
Nobody is arguing that mobility gets tougher for some people as they age. That's not the discussion. The discussion is: Calories In
Prattling on and on about all of the ailments that prevents one from moving only strengthens my original statement. If one is moving less, then one is burning fewer calories. This, the only way to lose weight, is to eat less food. It's quite simple, really.
Put another way, the *type* of calorie matters. If you are obese, the only way to address it is to address the biochemistry, not the math.
No. Fat is not created out of nothing. Fat is created from calories. Biochemistry may influence how many calories are absorbed or burned, but it all still comes down to calories: Calories In Calories Used = Weight Loss. First law of thermodynamics. If you're fat, eat less.
If one is overweight, one needs to eat fewer calories that trigger insulin response.
The laws of physics will always win out over any small factors like insulin response, metabolism, etc. Calories consumed
Anybody who can prove otherwise has also disproven one of the fundamental laws of thermodynamics that govern our known universe.
It's close enough that anybody can choose to eat so that one doesn't get fat.
Besides, if it's a strict measure of the amount of energy in an object as you say, then the calorie count on a package of food can only be too high, anyway.
If the calorie count is too HIGH, that's even MORE reason for a person not to eat that food.
Thus, the calorie count on food packages is more than sufficient.
All semantics aside, If one is overweight (for whatever reason), one needs to eat fewer calories.
You could also eat a neutron star, and you certainly wouldn't get fat, either.
In reality, though, we have those nice labels on all of our foods that show us how many calories we will get by eating whatever the food is. It's not that complicated.
Right. You burn fewer calories as you get older and less active. You need to eat less. What's your point?
It isn't completely written yet, much less tested. In other words it doesn't, and with that large of code base in this state won't, work (see IRS).
Who cares? People are still getting signed up for health insurance. Isn't that the whole point of this project?
They're incorrect plan and price quotes? They make you enter your vitals before you can compare? Just two reasons off the top of my head.
So instead of possibly getting incorrect (or correct information), it's a better idea to just continue not having health insurance? Really?
#2 is mostly bullshit. It doesn't matter what you eat, in terms of obesity. It's simple calories in, calories out. I eat tons of bread and starchy foods, and can maintain my weight just fine if my calories in are what they're supposed to be.
By this point, I think people generally understand that Healthcare.gov is to be avoided if at all possible. This system of systems is a monster (reportedly 500 million lines of code at 60-70% completion), and it's probably too big to test -- testing might take longer than it took to write, i.e., the QA death spiral.
I fail to see what a large codebase has to do with end users using or not using it.
The only reason to use the exchange is to get a subsidy. If you are a normal taxpayer who won't qualify for one, go off-exchange.
Why wouldn't somebody want to compare plans and prices available off-exchange with those in the exchange, exactly?
Maybe doctors are not prescribing drugs for obesity because it's 100% curable without any kind of drug...?
Right. I understand. You're still describing Views.
I had never heard of Reactive Programming before, but after reading the article, it seems that Reactive Programming is the same thing as using views, which have been a part of mature RDBMS's for several decades now. Am I missing something obvious?
So you lost a job AND put yourself in legal jeopardy? Somehow I don't think that was the best way to handle your problem...
Why find another job? That doesn't make any sense.
No, I think that Windows would install on those very easily, in fact. It's very generic hardware.
It has the same shiny happy GUI interfaces that Windows and MacOS has and always has.
That's hilarious!
Not really. That's a nice fantasy you have there but the reality is much harsher.
What PC hardware can one NOT install Windows on?
Windows only has an advantage because it's pre-loaded.
Oh right. It's on 95% of all PC's on the planet because it's "pre-loaded". Right. Whatever you say.
Wow. I really hope you're not a product of public schools.
. It's the lockdown that is the cause of the eminent death of the PC industry. Why buy a general computing device that doesn't let you do general computing? Can't believe Microsoft sold the hardware manufacturers on this shit.
Kid, what in the HELL are you talking about?
You can only do things with Linux if you're willing to devote your life to learning to use the damn thing, and you can't do anything with Apple machines because the OS is locked to the machine. The only OS maker that makes an OS that you can freely (and easily) install on almost any piece of computer hardware on the planet is Microsoft.
Spoken like a true non-business owner. I said it's not a burden, and you call that "fact-free". Either you have no idea what you're talking about, or you find that paying taxes is too difficult for you to figure out.
You say that a child's lemonade stand has similar regulatory burdens as McDonald's. Fuck you. You're an idiot.
Oh, quit with the "regulatory burden" bullshit. It's a TINY burden in exchange for being able to sell to every person in the country. You wouldn't know "regulatory burden" if it hit you in the head. If you're too stupid or too lazy to figure out how to pay the taxes you're supposed to pay, then you're too stupid or lazy to be in business.
When little kids can't even run a lemonade stand in their home's driveway on a summer afternoon any more without dealing with the same regulatory burdens and costs that a McDonald's does, there's something wrong.
You're right. That would suck. What does that have to do with this discussion?
Payroll tax updates are a whopping $180/year. (http://payroll.intuit.com/) Even if sales tax updates are more expensive, its still not a burden. Probably less than most hosting plans, actually. And, I'll be willing to bet good money that it'll be built right into most major eCommerce platforms as well.
The rest of us, and most new startups, will crumble under the burden.
No, you just pay a service to handle the sales tax for you. If you can't afford to do that, then you don't have a viable business.
Do you know how small businesses handle payroll taxes now? Do you know how often the rules change? Do you know how much has to be deducted from each person at each time in every different situation? No? Neither do I. That's why small businesses pay a service to take care of all of this. There are also services that will handle all of the sales tax rules, as well. It isn't rocket science.
That's terrible. I'm honestly sorry for you. I guess I live in an awesome place. I can get everything (not just computer shit) I need locally without going to any big box stores or buying online. I simply wouldn't live in a place, that say, had no local computer stores, or no local book stores, etc.