Mod me down as you want, but BBC is no longer what it used to be: now they even create their own stories with hired actors, and the only difference between them and a tabloid is the scarcity of sex and slaughter stories, scarcity compensated with "climate porn" and iPod-related "science" news.
My take is that they took both sets of numbers out of their corporate umbilici.
Or, you can look at automation as a tool to let you get more done, and you will be one of the self-motivated go-getters that can be a VP of Technology since you don't have to bother yourself with peon work anymore.
from the summary above:
So many Web 2.0 apps are sold (or given away for free) by software-as-a-service companies like Google that people can bypass IT altogether, and IT might not even know until it's too late
The submitter wants to tell us that "automation" and Google will make obsolete the need to read and understand hundreds of pages of government regulations, will make obsolete the need to understand the way the client's business works, will make obsolete the need to juggle with calendars and hocus-pocus holidays and "Days of Odysseus", will make obsolete the need to devise workarounds to deal with the latest hyped technology, will make obsolete the need to sit down and talk calmly and politely with people that want to pay you 500 Euro to write them a clone of "Yahoo" ?
If that's what you both mean, then I pray for that day to come, so that all the boring but utterly necessarily operations will be left to Web 2.0 apps, "automation" and Google, and I will be allowed to have fun and be paid to work on the really interesting but not so vital stuff I don't have time to deal with right now.
If it happens to be better than kevlar for that, and lighter, then heck yeah. I'm probably not going to get drafted, but if I were ever put into combat, then I know I'll be hoping they're passing this out. Armor must be heavy to be effective... with a light armor the shock alone can kill you, while the inertia of a heavy armor would take the edge of that. Light armor is useful only in hand to hand combat using only very small knives.
I would state this differently: You can't win the peace with weapons.
The USSR took over many countries with the use of weapons, then went bankrupt with the burden of the cost of maintaining their victories with the use of weapons. (So did the Roman Empire.) It's a lesson with lots of examples throughout history.
Have to break it to you: you are the only one who knows why did the Roman Empire end. It would be kind of you to point the clueless historians to the sources that give you such certainty:).
which English ? US, UK, NZ, Australian ? Serbians/Croatians and Rumanians/Moldavians are in the same situation, having their own native language as a second language...
You will need a lot of "extra": harvesters, transport, seed separators, oil presses, composting facilities and a lot of water for composting and manpower for preparing the compost heaps/tanks, cleaning, distributing the compost etc., storage for oil, oil refineries (yes, bio oil needs to be refined, even the oil used for cooking: otherwise your kitchen and your streets will stink to high heaven).
Then there will come regulations because bio-oils contain enough extra organic molecules to cover the cities with toxic smog, worse than the diesel engines.
At last, mineral fuels will be "rediscovered" as a source of reasonably clean and efficient energy, and the farmers in the third world that bought into the bio craze will go bankrupt, while the farmers in the US and EU will receive new subsidies.
well, Sun Tzu was not really Chinese... China did not exist yet at that time, was only invented later (look up for the great burning of books:) ); he was a citizen of Wu, one of the states that preceded Qin. Saying that Sun Tzu was Chinese is the same as saying that King Artur was English.
Regardless of who is in power China it has had a "foreign policy" that for 2000yrs has shown little (if any) interest in expanding China's borders.
that is true... considering that about 2000 years ago China reached the desert or the tundra in the North and North-West, the high plateau of Tibet in the West, the ocean in the East and South and the evil sons of... that do not understand true manners (i.e.: submitting to Chinese rule) in Vietnam, Burma and Korea.
When looking at a map, China does not seem so big, but it's just an illusion, and Mercator is to blame. It's huge, and hugely heterogeneous: an "ethnic minority" in China might be tens of millions strong and live on a territory larger than a large European country. There are more religions that you can care about if you are not a Eliade clone, and enough scripts to fill the blank spaces in the UTF standard. Talking about 100 BC China is an anachronism: most of the time, since there are any kind of written records about China up to now, there were several states warring among themselves, who sometimes recognized the "emperor", and most of the times did not even have the concept of an "emperor of China".
I am tired of the Chinese complaining about Western imperialism. In the early 1800s China was pretty much draining Europe of gold by high tariffs and trade restrictions. Western merchants could trade only in a few ports, only with a few government-approved Chinese trading houses, and opium was the only merchandise that had a high enough profit margin to make smuggling it in pay for the expenses. The treaties that were imposed on China were not different than the treaties the European powers signed among themselves.
The greatest obstacle in the way to Chinese world dominance is not USA. It's China itself. The greatest threat to USA and Europe is not a strong China, but China breaking up in warring states. China does not build up it's military to teach a lesson to Japan or USA, but to be able stomp on any local party leader that might begin to believe he can emulate Eltsin and his pals and carve his own empire out of the "Middle Kingdom".
We should pray for a strong and prosperous China. Soviet Union fired up it's propaganda machine in preparation for it's surrender in the Cold War and the possible secession of it's republics about 1988, and not to prevent that, but to make sure it happens peacefully. China does not seem to be willing to do the same, and, in my opinion, it will stay in one piece only as long as the central government will be able to offer the local leaders something they cannot (or are not allowed to) provide for themselves: Western know-how and financing. When that spring will run dry, only the high tech army that the central government is building now will be able to delay a repeat of the civil war of the early 1900s
Then again it could also just be a case of IP laws not synching up between Russia and elsewhere in the world. The Russian law says anyone distributing "music" has to pay, to a central office, a certain amount of money per each piece sold and those money can be claimed by the copyright holders. I wonder if that fee is smaller than what they get from iTunes...
there are strategic nukes, and there are tactical nukes... a big steel ball, or even a chunk of rock, would perform good enough; my point is that there are technologies that should not be shared.
You cannot use a baseball bat to put a 500 Kg steel ball in orbit, which would make a weapon as good as a nuke, and a cleaner one. Aiming it would be only slightly difficult, but for a large city it would not matter.
As for UAV, it depends: if the project is about building model planes with a camera on them, I would not worry. If the project is about building a flying platform that can fly for hours and can carry 2-3 kg of gears, I would worry about it, and would not make it open source.
imagine your slick sports car with an engine twice as big... it will be more efficient for long drives at constant speed, but it will stop being slick.
having read quite a lot of EU regulations, I can say with some degree of certainty that whatever EU translated to English after 2000 was probably outsourced to Japan or Turkey, but not to a country where "indo-european" languages are spoken. Older regulations of the ECs are fine, but some of the relatively new ones are quite bad... word order is usually f***** up and there was one where there was no verb in a paragraph of 5 lines...
A lot of people have been criticizing the DailyTech article for the line "Then again-- maybe not. I strongly suspect this story will receive little to no attention from the mainstream media."
well, the original story was on climateaudit.org, and is kind of old, almost a week. So far I have not seen anything in MSM.
Math is a gateway to Critical Thinking or Logic. The kind of accuracy and clarity you get with math...
funny... 100 years ago they said the same thing about Latin: teaches accuracy, clarity, good style etc. Fact is: it was the Latin authors that the student was supposed to be enabled to read were able to teach clarity, good style, logic etc. and in the end we were left with learning declination and conjugation tables by rote, nobody read Cicero for pleasure and self improvement, and everybody hated Latin.
I guess if mathematics are taught for the sake of training students in accuracy and clarity and other cool stuff, the next generations will hate math even more than we, the unlucky few to survive from the age of mandatory Latin, hate Latin.
Mathematics should be taught for it's own sake: if it's useful. Or maybe statistical mathematics should be taught...Right now I wish I had more classes about that and less non-euclidean geometry.
Well, he does not do that. Really. Corporatism has nothing to do with Big and Ugly, Inc.. It's about a modern version of the medieval guilds, also called corporations: professional organizations that regulated mostly everything for their members, from the prices they would ask, the wages they would pay or receive, to the number of new members to be accepted and the rules they had to comply, to retirement funds, support for widows and children etc.
Mussolini's most promoted innovation were the corporations: professional organizations that were supposed to include both workers and owners, and who were supposed to plan production and set production quotas for each company involved, so those would not be hurt by competition, set prices, take care of the elderly, the young and the disabled etc. Mussolini's Fascism was socialism with owners: he started most of the practices now associated with Soviet Union. He failed miserably, it is true: even in 1928, 6 years after he took the power, the labor unions and the vestiges of the Socialist party were giving him trouble, and in the '30 it was said that there was only one corporation that worked, that of the cinema and theater machinists. What worked was the state and the owners cooperating successfully in keeping the wages down and the foreign competitors out.
Soviet Union was not a planned economy from the start: after the Civil War ended a new economic policy was enacted: free enterprise and a few state run projects, mostly in the defense industry (BTW, Germany secretly built tanks and trained it's tank crews in Soviet Union up to 1933). The shift to planned economy was caused by two facts:
1. The drop in wheat prices, caused mainly by the Western countries not removing the agricultural subsidies they began to offer during the Great War; the prices went so low that about 1926 Russia almost could not afford to export cereals, and so lost an important source of income.
2. The crisis of 1929, which took out most of the other sources of income for the state.
Planning was an attempt to fix an economy that was already in disarray.
The purges were of two kinds: first, were the fights within the Party, in which Stalin was at first one of the contestants, and later the arbiter, and second, were a way to "persuade" people to move and work in the not very pleasant climate of the North or in Siberia. Paying people to move there was tried, and worked, but not as much as the Party needed.
The Ukrainian famine: that's tricky.
The plains in the Southern Russia and in the Ukraine, even down to the Lower Danube valley were inhabited by herdsmen for a long time because agriculture is damn' difficult: long and very cold winters, extremely hot and dry summers (the Lower Danube valley gets less than half the rain France gets, and it grown worse as you move farther to the East), so you need a lot of investment to stay ahead of the weather. The Cernoziom soil is very rich, indeed, but it's no help unless it rains, and irrigating does not help unless you have distiled water, otherwise the salts would accumulate and soon you won't be able to grow anything. The reserves that had to be kept were larger than what an English farmer would have needed: in Southern Ukraine and Eastern Rumania it was customary, in the XIXth century and even later, to keep the equivalent of one entire harvest in reserve, just in case you'll have to live through one or two bad years. What I think happened, because the Communists could not have been that stupid to kill on purpose the most important resource they had, the people, was that once the state could not pay the price the farmers believed was the right one, it started requisitioning, and went into the reserve I wrote above believing the farmers were hoarding it out of greed. First dry spring that happened resulted in widespread famine. I might be wrong, though, and the Communists were indeed that dumb to choose to kill by hunger those among whom were lots that fought for them during the Civil War,
No, it's anti-social-Darwinism week and anti-aestheticist-politics pride week... and fitness-is-a-scam pride week, too.
And no, they don't burn their muscles like you were describing in your little story because they remember to eat plenty of carbs before and while they were out.
Tell that to the poor bodybuilder schmuck who had to find out what renal dialysis means; and he did not eat plenty of carbs because carbs are bad.
Your situation was extreme because people were basically forced to starve themselves
if 3500+ calories means starving... unless you count them according to the fitness manuals.
Most fat people could not even come close to performing in situations like that.
... so we might differ on what "fat" means. Can you explain me your scale ?
Some would say it was the Indian competition in textiles (those guys and gals could make a much better thread at much lower prices that the Englishmen could) that forced England to invest in mechanical devices, resulting increased productivity.
Very good, that was the intent of that statement. Now what does the BMI measure?
BMI measures the compliance with the ideal picture of the Nordic/Indo-german warrior as imagined around 1900, when the whole fantasy about "fitness" began. Get a copy of Jack London's "The Valley of the Moon" if you want to read some almost-politically-correct racial and fitness fantasies. Edgar Rice Burroughs would do, too...
... maybe we talk about different kinds of "fat"; my scale:
obese:
has trouble putting on the shoes and functioning normally
fat:
gets pestered by doctors and is made fun by others because s/he has less than perfect waistline and the abdominal muscles cannot be perfectly discerned
n certain conditions cocaine can be medically beneficial, its a very good pain reliever. In fact, those conditions are much more common in our society than those where fat is beneficial. By your logic, would that mean that it would be wrong to say coke is unhealthy?
Those were not extreme conditions, only the conditions for which the fitness advocates pretend you need to prepared for: the tracks were not much more difficult than what a tourist does while backpacking in the mountains. The difficulty was more in doing that every damn' day on any weather, keeping the formation in the forest or among the rocks and getting back in time. I was not talking about the body fat, but about the notion of counting calories and about what means to be "fit". My point was that people that claimed to be fit, looked as if they were fit, and kept on the regime that previously made them look "fit" failed to keep up with people that believed that being fit is being able to perform, and not necessarily have the looks and the BMI.
Most people don't need to lift 300lbs, so why spend time and damage your joints in a fitness club ?
hardly useless ? It's one of the last holdouts from the eugenics age. I just hope we won't have to get to "workout macht frei" camps to discredit it, the way "arbeit macht frei" camps discredited the eugenics as a science.
BMI is desined to reward tall and lean guys... fortunately they dropped the "blond hair, blue eyes" requirement.
Fat is unhealthy ? Fat is your long term energy storage. My take is that some people get obese because they are already sick: something is wrong with their metabolism. Otherwise, fat is good. I have seen this in the alpine troops, they even had a catch-phrase about it: "the fatsos will get lean, and the lean guys will die". While the "fit" guys were better at doing spectacularly macho stuff (hanging on ropes, jumping over obstacles etc. which are useful only for showing off during parades and such), when it came to the read deal namely marching in the mountains while carrying weight, the bodybuilders and the "fit" guys tended to collapse after 15 to 20 miles of climbing and descending, while the 5.5 feet fatsos had to carry them and their equipment back to base. While on the trek, while the "over 30 BMI" would burn fat, the bodybuilders would burn muscle, and kidneys don't like that much. For the first month I felt I was going die, and for the first two months I lost a lot of fat, but after that I got used with the regime, began gaining back the fat I lost, and even could light a cigarette on the trek without seeing the darkness close around me, while the "athletes" that counted their calories were still wheezing their lungs out whether they were smokers or not.
"as a general rule fat people weigh a lot for their height"... that's a pleonasm:)
Disclaimer: my tax money are going to the EU research budget since at least 2002, so I have the right to be p****** when they are spent on corporate welfare.
praised be Oh God [don't get "oh-another-fundamentalist-Christian" on me, please, it's a Pratchett reference], still four more month to spend working for "the man" before I get three years of real life experience, and with the 6 years wasted previously in research, I'll be, hopefully, able to cherry-pick a place of exile.
Slashdot Mirror
Mod me down as you want, but BBC is no longer what it used to be: now they even create their own stories with hired actors, and the only difference between them and a tabloid is the scarcity of sex and slaughter stories, scarcity compensated with "climate porn" and iPod-related "science" news.
My take is that they took both sets of numbers out of their corporate umbilici.
"If that's what you both mean," should be read "If that's what s/he means" ... getting late here ...
from the summary above:
So many Web 2.0 apps are sold (or given away for free) by software-as-a-service companies like Google that people can bypass IT altogether, and IT might not even know until it's too lateThe submitter wants to tell us that "automation" and Google will make obsolete the need to read and understand hundreds of pages of government regulations, will make obsolete the need to understand the way the client's business works, will make obsolete the need to juggle with calendars and hocus-pocus holidays and "Days of Odysseus", will make obsolete the need to devise workarounds to deal with the latest hyped technology, will make obsolete the need to sit down and talk calmly and politely with people that want to pay you 500 Euro to write them a clone of "Yahoo" ?
If that's what you both mean, then I pray for that day to come, so that all the boring but utterly necessarily operations will be left to Web 2.0 apps, "automation" and Google, and I will be allowed to have fun and be paid to work on the really interesting but not so vital stuff I don't have time to deal with right now.
The USSR took over many countries with the use of weapons, then went bankrupt with the burden of the cost of maintaining their victories with the use of weapons. (So did the Roman Empire.) It's a lesson with lots of examples throughout history.
Have to break it to you: you are the only one who knows why did the Roman Empire end. It would be kind of you to point the clueless historians to the sources that give you such certainty :).
which English ? US, UK, NZ, Australian ? Serbians/Croatians and Rumanians/Moldavians are in the same situation, having their own native language as a second language ...
looks like defensive weapons take the upper hand over the attack gear ... again.
You will need a lot of "extra": harvesters, transport, seed separators, oil presses, composting facilities and a lot of water for composting and manpower for preparing the compost heaps/tanks, cleaning, distributing the compost etc., storage for oil, oil refineries (yes, bio oil needs to be refined, even the oil used for cooking: otherwise your kitchen and your streets will stink to high heaven).
Then there will come regulations because bio-oils contain enough extra organic molecules to cover the cities with toxic smog, worse than the diesel engines.
At last, mineral fuels will be "rediscovered" as a source of reasonably clean and efficient energy, and the farmers in the third world that bought into the bio craze will go bankrupt, while the farmers in the US and EU will receive new subsidies.
well, Sun Tzu was not really Chinese ... China did not exist yet at that time, was only invented later (look up for the great burning of books :) ); he was a citizen of Wu, one of the states that preceded Qin. Saying that Sun Tzu was Chinese is the same as saying that King Artur was English.
that is true ... considering that about 2000 years ago China reached the desert or the tundra in the North and North-West, the high plateau of Tibet in the West, the ocean in the East and South and the evil sons of ... that do not understand true manners (i.e.: submitting to Chinese rule) in Vietnam, Burma and Korea.
When looking at a map, China does not seem so big, but it's just an illusion, and Mercator is to blame. It's huge, and hugely heterogeneous: an "ethnic minority" in China might be tens of millions strong and live on a territory larger than a large European country. There are more religions that you can care about if you are not a Eliade clone, and enough scripts to fill the blank spaces in the UTF standard. Talking about 100 BC China is an anachronism: most of the time, since there are any kind of written records about China up to now, there were several states warring among themselves, who sometimes recognized the "emperor", and most of the times did not even have the concept of an "emperor of China".
I am tired of the Chinese complaining about Western imperialism. In the early 1800s China was pretty much draining Europe of gold by high tariffs and trade restrictions. Western merchants could trade only in a few ports, only with a few government-approved Chinese trading houses, and opium was the only merchandise that had a high enough profit margin to make smuggling it in pay for the expenses. The treaties that were imposed on China were not different than the treaties the European powers signed among themselves.
The greatest obstacle in the way to Chinese world dominance is not USA. It's China itself. The greatest threat to USA and Europe is not a strong China, but China breaking up in warring states. China does not build up it's military to teach a lesson to Japan or USA, but to be able stomp on any local party leader that might begin to believe he can emulate Eltsin and his pals and carve his own empire out of the "Middle Kingdom".
We should pray for a strong and prosperous China. Soviet Union fired up it's propaganda machine in preparation for it's surrender in the Cold War and the possible secession of it's republics about 1988, and not to prevent that, but to make sure it happens peacefully. China does not seem to be willing to do the same, and, in my opinion, it will stay in one piece only as long as the central government will be able to offer the local leaders something they cannot (or are not allowed to) provide for themselves: Western know-how and financing. When that spring will run dry, only the high tech army that the central government is building now will be able to delay a repeat of the civil war of the early 1900s
If they are in prison, they are not "the brightest".
there are strategic nukes, and there are tactical nukes ... a big steel ball, or even a chunk of rock, would perform good enough; my point is that there are technologies that should not be shared.
You cannot use a baseball bat to put a 500 Kg steel ball in orbit, which would make a weapon as good as a nuke, and a cleaner one. Aiming it would be only slightly difficult, but for a large city it would not matter.
As for UAV, it depends: if the project is about building model planes with a camera on them, I would not worry. If the project is about building a flying platform that can fly for hours and can carry 2-3 kg of gears, I would worry about it, and would not make it open source.
imagine your slick sports car with an engine twice as big ... it will be more efficient for long drives at constant speed, but it will stop being slick.
having read quite a lot of EU regulations, I can say with some degree of certainty that whatever EU translated to English after 2000 was probably outsourced to Japan or Turkey, but not to a country where "indo-european" languages are spoken. Older regulations of the ECs are fine, but some of the relatively new ones are quite bad ... word order is usually f***** up and there was one where there was no verb in a paragraph of 5 lines ...
funny ... 100 years ago they said the same thing about Latin: teaches accuracy, clarity, good style etc. Fact is: it was the Latin authors that the student was supposed to be enabled to read were able to teach clarity, good style, logic etc. and in the end we were left with learning declination and conjugation tables by rote, nobody read Cicero for pleasure and self improvement, and everybody hated Latin.
I guess if mathematics are taught for the sake of training students in accuracy and clarity and other cool stuff, the next generations will hate math even more than we, the unlucky few to survive from the age of mandatory Latin, hate Latin.
Mathematics should be taught for it's own sake: if it's useful. Or maybe statistical mathematics should be taught ...Right now I wish I had more classes about that and less non-euclidean geometry.
Well, he does not do that. Really. Corporatism has nothing to do with Big and Ugly, Inc.. It's about a modern version of the medieval guilds, also called corporations: professional organizations that regulated mostly everything for their members, from the prices they would ask, the wages they would pay or receive, to the number of new members to be accepted and the rules they had to comply, to retirement funds, support for widows and children etc.
Mussolini's most promoted innovation were the corporations: professional organizations that were supposed to include both workers and owners, and who were supposed to plan production and set production quotas for each company involved, so those would not be hurt by competition, set prices, take care of the elderly, the young and the disabled etc. Mussolini's Fascism was socialism with owners: he started most of the practices now associated with Soviet Union. He failed miserably, it is true: even in 1928, 6 years after he took the power, the labor unions and the vestiges of the Socialist party were giving him trouble, and in the '30 it was said that there was only one corporation that worked, that of the cinema and theater machinists. What worked was the state and the owners cooperating successfully in keeping the wages down and the foreign competitors out.
Soviet Union was not a planned economy from the start: after the Civil War ended a new economic policy was enacted: free enterprise and a few state run projects, mostly in the defense industry (BTW, Germany secretly built tanks and trained it's tank crews in Soviet Union up to 1933). The shift to planned economy was caused by two facts:
1. The drop in wheat prices, caused mainly by the Western countries not removing the agricultural subsidies they began to offer during the Great War; the prices went so low that about 1926 Russia almost could not afford to export cereals, and so lost an important source of income.
2. The crisis of 1929, which took out most of the other sources of income for the state.
Planning was an attempt to fix an economy that was already in disarray.
The purges were of two kinds: first, were the fights within the Party, in which Stalin was at first one of the contestants, and later the arbiter, and second, were a way to "persuade" people to move and work in the not very pleasant climate of the North or in Siberia. Paying people to move there was tried, and worked, but not as much as the Party needed.
The Ukrainian famine: that's tricky.
The plains in the Southern Russia and in the Ukraine, even down to the Lower Danube valley were inhabited by herdsmen for a long time because agriculture is damn' difficult: long and very cold winters, extremely hot and dry summers (the Lower Danube valley gets less than half the rain France gets, and it grown worse as you move farther to the East), so you need a lot of investment to stay ahead of the weather. The Cernoziom soil is very rich, indeed, but it's no help unless it rains, and irrigating does not help unless you have distiled water, otherwise the salts would accumulate and soon you won't be able to grow anything. The reserves that had to be kept were larger than what an English farmer would have needed: in Southern Ukraine and Eastern Rumania it was customary, in the XIXth century and even later, to keep the equivalent of one entire harvest in reserve, just in case you'll have to live through one or two bad years. What I think happened, because the Communists could not have been that stupid to kill on purpose the most important resource they had, the people, was that once the state could not pay the price the farmers believed was the right one, it started requisitioning, and went into the reserve I wrote above believing the farmers were hoarding it out of greed. First dry spring that happened resulted in widespread famine. I might be wrong, though, and the Communists were indeed that dumb to choose to kill by hunger those among whom were lots that fought for them during the Civil War,
No, it's anti-social-Darwinism week and anti-aestheticist-politics pride week ... and fitness-is-a-scam pride week, too.
Tell that to the poor bodybuilder schmuck who had to find out what renal dialysis means; and he did not eat plenty of carbs because carbs are bad.
if 3500+ calories means starving ... unless you count them according to the fitness manuals.
Some would say it was the Indian competition in textiles (those guys and gals could make a much better thread at much lower prices that the Englishmen could) that forced England to invest in mechanical devices, resulting increased productivity.
BMI measures the compliance with the ideal picture of the Nordic/Indo-german warrior as imagined around 1900, when the whole fantasy about "fitness" began. Get a copy of Jack London's "The Valley of the Moon" if you want to read some almost-politically-correct racial and fitness fantasies. Edgar Rice Burroughs would do, too ...
... maybe we talk about different kinds of "fat"; my scale:
obese: has trouble putting on the shoes and functioning normally fat: gets pestered by doctors and is made fun by others because s/he has less than perfect waistline and the abdominal muscles cannot be perfectly discerned Those were not extreme conditions, only the conditions for which the fitness advocates pretend you need to prepared for: the tracks were not much more difficult than what a tourist does while backpacking in the mountains. The difficulty was more in doing that every damn' day on any weather, keeping the formation in the forest or among the rocks and getting back in time. I was not talking about the body fat, but about the notion of counting calories and about what means to be "fit". My point was that people that claimed to be fit, looked as if they were fit, and kept on the regime that previously made them look "fit" failed to keep up with people that believed that being fit is being able to perform, and not necessarily have the looks and the BMI.Most people don't need to lift 300lbs, so why spend time and damage your joints in a fitness club ?
hardly useless ? It's one of the last holdouts from the eugenics age. I just hope we won't have to get to "workout macht frei" camps to discredit it, the way "arbeit macht frei" camps discredited the eugenics as a science.
... fortunately they dropped the "blond hair, blue eyes" requirement.
... that's a pleonasm :)
BMI is desined to reward tall and lean guys
Fat is unhealthy ? Fat is your long term energy storage. My take is that some people get obese because they are already sick: something is wrong with their metabolism. Otherwise, fat is good. I have seen this in the alpine troops, they even had a catch-phrase about it: "the fatsos will get lean, and the lean guys will die". While the "fit" guys were better at doing spectacularly macho stuff (hanging on ropes, jumping over obstacles etc. which are useful only for showing off during parades and such), when it came to the read deal namely marching in the mountains while carrying weight, the bodybuilders and the "fit" guys tended to collapse after 15 to 20 miles of climbing and descending, while the 5.5 feet fatsos had to carry them and their equipment back to base. While on the trek, while the "over 30 BMI" would burn fat, the bodybuilders would burn muscle, and kidneys don't like that much. For the first month I felt I was going die, and for the first two months I lost a lot of fat, but after that I got used with the regime, began gaining back the fat I lost, and even could light a cigarette on the trek without seeing the darkness close around me, while the "athletes" that counted their calories were still wheezing their lungs out whether they were smokers or not.
"as a general rule fat people weigh a lot for their height"
Disclaimer: my tax money are going to the EU research budget since at least 2002, so I have the right to be p****** when they are spent on corporate welfare. praised be Oh God [don't get "oh-another-fundamentalist-Christian" on me, please, it's a Pratchett reference], still four more month to spend working for "the man" before I get three years of real life experience, and with the 6 years wasted previously in research, I'll be, hopefully, able to cherry-pick a place of exile.