Seems like you cant simply presume your body will increase metabolism to burn extra calories.
Sure you can. Because it does. Otherwise people who overate by 1 calorie every day would get bigger and bigger until they pop like Mr. Creosote.
Your resting metabolic requirement is the number of pounds you weigh times a number usually between 10 and 15, depending on how sedentary your lifestyle is.
Eat more calories and your weight goes up. When your weight goes up, you require more calories to stay there. A stasis point is reached and your weight stabilizes.
Obesity is when that point of stasis is so high that the extra weight causes other medical problems.
I know what I am talking about. I am obese. I have been for probably 20 years. I've gotten a mini medical education on the subject. Your suggestion that matabolic requirements are unrelated to body mass is factually incorrect.
If you increased your caloric intake by only 2% beyond the rate of metabolism (assuming a 2000 calorie daily intake), and you didn't increase the rate you metabolize, you would gain about 1 lb every 4 months. After 1 year you would gain about 3 lbs. After 20 years you would gain 60 lbs.
Your assumption is without merit. If your starting metabolic rate is 2000 calories, and you eat a steady 2500 calories, your weight will go up, but so will your metabolic requirements. Presuming you stick with those 2500 calories, your weight will go up by so many pounds, then level off.
Humans need anywhere from 10-15 calories per pound per day to just sit on a couch.
It's more properly called the Audio Home Recording Act. It is the giant upon whose shoulders the DMCA is perched. At the time it was passed, it did not get nearly the outrage and attention it should have (that does not imply that it didn't get tons of both - it did, but passed anyway). It was the mechanism by which the Rio got hassled (the Rio escaped by the skin of its parallel cable - the fact that it was a computer peripheral was all that spared it). The AHRA, I believe, is every bit as horrible as INDUCE threatens to be today.
[...] I'd look around for an older dual-G4 desktop [...]
Word.
OS X behaves fantastically on older hardware. Here's my story:
My wife and I have G5s, she has an iBook, I have a TiBook, so we're pretty thoroughly Mac-ified.
A friend of hers told us that she was given an iMac (turns out it's a tangerine 266 MHz G3 iMac rev C from early 1999) and never really used it much. She wanted to get it online. It was running OS 8.5. It had 32M of RAM.
I got it an upgrade to 512M of RAM, OS 10.3.5, and got her hooked up with DSL (PPPoE, no less). The whole thing wound up being about $250 (separately she also bought a low end HP scanner/printer combo).
It works really well, for such an old machine. I can find things out there that make it bog down (it won't play DVDs and it's not going to be used for video editing or gaming), but I'm surprised at how resilient it is for most tasks.
I installed OpenOffice (under X11) for times when I need compatibility, but I'm intentionally staying away from MS Office on OSX for now [...]
Both you and the article author have ignored Appleworks. Why? It's cheap, and it's probably more than enough word processor and spreadsheet for anyone reading this. Add Keynote if you need a PowerPoint workalike, and substitute the Mail/Address Book/iCal troika for Entourage and you've achieved at least parity without spending nearly as much money (and giving none of it to Microsoft).
The bandwidth of your Internet connection is what they're after. Just the thing for surfing for kiddie porn, or hosting torrents of warez, or sending gobs of spam... I know I don't want my address space associated with any of that sort of thing.
The fix is to make sure you insist on using componenets capable of not WEP, but WPA, and that (if you're using a preshared passphrase) your password is a good one.
Better yet, go back in time and explain it to Jefferson Davis.
Perhaps even better, explain it to Preston Brooks and/or Charles Sumner.
But don't get in your head the image of the holy, equality-for-all abolishionists on the one hand and the slaveholders on the other. The reality is that a lot of northerners were more concerned about the effects of slavery on white unemployment than they were about the fate of the slaves. Even in the North, free blacks weren't treated as equals (of course, some would argue that they still aren't).
The music channels are commercial free. XM makes no false pretenses about other channels.
The really annoying part of that truth is that the XM Comedy channel isn't music... so there are ads. And they're the worst. ads. ever. The sort of products you get spam for. Blech. The very reason I put "Smart Mute" in MacXM
I have a level 5 Athlon with a +2 video card of OpenGL and a +1 bank of memory. Unfortunately, I went to eBay and got saddled with a -3 sound card of Aureal.
That may be true where the pot is indeed raked. At all of the cardrooms I frequent here in Northern California, they take a time payment instead, which means they truly have no interest at all in the outcome, other than, perhaps, to keep as many butts in the seats as possible.
Never having played online poker, what's to stop 3 friends joining the same game then working together to milk the others at the table?
NOTHING AT ALL!
That's the problem. The casino software can't possibly know that you're not using IM to chat with other players. At least in an offline cardroom they would likely get caught trying to signal.
Even if players don't collude, they have an opportunity to use aids to calculate pot odds and engage in other cheating that they'd have no chance of doing in a real cardroom.
The house makes money because the probability is in their favor
No. Poker is different. The house makes money because they charge a time payment or rake the pot. The house is not involved in the game - they simply supply the venue and the referee (the dealer). That's why you can play Poker in California other than on an Indian reservation.
In Poker, the house has no interest in the outcome (presuming the game is not crooked - that the dealer and a shill are not in cohoots). The house gets their money by raking the pot (taking a percentage) or charging a time payment from one of the players (each hand the person paying rotates). That's why Poker is about the only form of gambling where you as a player have a fair shot (notwithstanding the story of the MIT Blackjack team).
I can't imagine trusting online Poker play. Even if the site/house is honest, players can share information secretly or use aids to calculate pot odds perfectly. They can do that in offline games as well, but it is much more difficult to get away with it.
6to4 is completely autonomous. Because it encodes the IPv4 address of your 6to4 router in your prefix, everyone knows how to get the packets back to you. The only thing that needs to be configured is a default route for reaching non-6to4 destinations. Fortunately, you can simply use 2002:40a8:47d1:: and let RFC 3068 do the work for you.:-)
So there's no reason that anyone can't start using 6to4 immediately, unless they totally lack a public IPv4 address.
The implication in the discussion of TLA, NLA and SLA imply that customers will be getting/64s. Unless things have changed since last I checked, customers will actually be getting/48s. That is, the NLA represents both the retail ISP and the customer, and the SLA is 16 bits of subnet that the customer can use to subdivide their network. Each subnet will be a/64, which fits in with the automatic negotiation of suffixes for most hosts (take your EIN-48, aka your Ethernet address, xor the top byte with 2 and stick FFFE in the middle - 8:0:20:AA:BB:CC -> a00:20ff:feaa:bbcc).
This article misses on an opportunity to discuss 6to4, which is a way that anyone with a single static IPv4 address (actually, it doesn't have to be static, but if it is dynamic, then your IPv6 prefix will change whenever it does) can have their own IPv6/48 today. In fact, it saddens me a bit that Netgear and those bozos haven't made IPv6 support at the very least optional in their little NAT router boxen. Any device that is an IPv4 NAT is in an excellent position to provide IPv6 connectivity (and, of course, firewalling) with 6to4.
Broadcast station call signs are trademarked as a matter of course. The callsign itself, it its sterile "This is K-O-I-T-F-M, San Francisco" sense is one thing, but "You're listening to KOIT (pronounced as one sylable this time), lite rock, less talk" is undoubtedly a trademark.
That's more or less how it works in Canada. By doing the counting at each individual polling place, the individual bits of paper really only matter once, and matter only in a context where their numbers are manageable. Once the numbers at a particular polling place are agreed upon by everyone who bothered to stay, then the election is merely all about insuring that those numbers are all correct all the way up the line. Heck, at that point I could even see using the Internet as a cheap and convenient means of transmitting those numbers to the state election organizing body, so long as they also get written down on paper with autographs and kept secure somewhere at the county level.
But how is your system not still an anonymous vote? Does the ballot have your name or some other piece of information traceable to you on it? Does someone watch you place the "X"? Does someone look at your completed ballot before you stuff it in the box? If the answers to all of those questions are "no," then there is no reason at all to be troubled. If the answers to any of those questions are "yes," then I'd have to wonder why that sort of thing is necessary, except for the obvious reason.
Actually, the way I'd phrase it is, "All we have are Athlon XPs, and you're complaining that you can't get better than Athlon 64 FX?" while the select few have G5s
if you feel that whoever received the most legal votes under Florida and Federal law won, then Gore won Florida by thousands of votes. It took a finely tuned machine to exclude enough Democratic votes while admitting Republican votes under the same criteria.
I call "Bullshit" on that.
There was an in depth, independent review of the Florida election after the Supreme Court ruling. Its results may not have reached through the coocoon of bullshit conspiracy hearings that you keep around you.
The Chicago Tribune said it best: "The study does not support charges that the U.S. Supreme Court's decision to halt recounts altered the course of history."
Read the article (use bugmenot.com if the registration requirements offend you). If Gore had gotten his way he still would have lost. If Bush had truly gotten his way, he would have lost.
Slashdot Mirror
Sure you can. Because it does. Otherwise people who overate by 1 calorie every day would get bigger and bigger until they pop like Mr. Creosote.
Your resting metabolic requirement is the number of pounds you weigh times a number usually between 10 and 15, depending on how sedentary your lifestyle is.
Eat more calories and your weight goes up. When your weight goes up, you require more calories to stay there. A stasis point is reached and your weight stabilizes.
Obesity is when that point of stasis is so high that the extra weight causes other medical problems.
I know what I am talking about. I am obese. I have been for probably 20 years. I've gotten a mini medical education on the subject. Your suggestion that matabolic requirements are unrelated to body mass is factually incorrect.
Your assumption is without merit. If your starting metabolic rate is 2000 calories, and you eat a steady 2500 calories, your weight will go up, but so will your metabolic requirements. Presuming you stick with those 2500 calories, your weight will go up by so many pounds, then level off.
Humans need anywhere from 10-15 calories per pound per day to just sit on a couch.
It's more properly called the Audio Home Recording Act. It is the giant upon whose shoulders the DMCA is perched. At the time it was passed, it did not get nearly the outrage and attention it should have (that does not imply that it didn't get tons of both - it did, but passed anyway). It was the mechanism by which the Rio got hassled (the Rio escaped by the skin of its parallel cable - the fact that it was a computer peripheral was all that spared it). The AHRA, I believe, is every bit as horrible as INDUCE threatens to be today.
There's an update that fixes that.
I do agree about the hopes for a full Aqua open source office suite (NeoOffice or otherwise).
Word.
OS X behaves fantastically on older hardware. Here's my story:
My wife and I have G5s, she has an iBook, I have a TiBook, so we're pretty thoroughly Mac-ified.
A friend of hers told us that she was given an iMac (turns out it's a tangerine 266 MHz G3 iMac rev C from early 1999) and never really used it much. She wanted to get it online. It was running OS 8.5. It had 32M of RAM.
I got it an upgrade to 512M of RAM, OS 10.3.5, and got her hooked up with DSL (PPPoE, no less). The whole thing wound up being about $250 (separately she also bought a low end HP scanner/printer combo).
It works really well, for such an old machine. I can find things out there that make it bog down (it won't play DVDs and it's not going to be used for video editing or gaming), but I'm surprised at how resilient it is for most tasks.
My wife's friend? She's very happy.
Both you and the article author have ignored Appleworks. Why? It's cheap, and it's probably more than enough word processor and spreadsheet for anyone reading this. Add Keynote if you need a PowerPoint workalike, and substitute the Mail/Address Book/iCal troika for Entourage and you've achieved at least parity without spending nearly as much money (and giving none of it to Microsoft).
Not quite. They pick and choose the bits of it they like.
The bandwidth of your Internet connection is what they're after. Just the thing for surfing for kiddie porn, or hosting torrents of warez, or sending gobs of spam... I know I don't want my address space associated with any of that sort of thing.
The fix is to make sure you insist on using componenets capable of not WEP, but WPA, and that (if you're using a preshared passphrase) your password is a good one.
Every one of the 2064 songs (more than 5 days worth) on my iPod is from my own CD and Tape collection or purchased from iTunes.
Fuck you, Ballmer.
Perhaps even better, explain it to Preston Brooks and/or Charles Sumner.
But don't get in your head the image of the holy, equality-for-all abolishionists on the one hand and the slaveholders on the other. The reality is that a lot of northerners were more concerned about the effects of slavery on white unemployment than they were about the fate of the slaves. Even in the North, free blacks weren't treated as equals (of course, some would argue that they still aren't).
The really annoying part of that truth is that the XM Comedy channel isn't music... so there are ads. And they're the worst. ads. ever. The sort of products you get spam for. Blech. The very reason I put "Smart Mute" in MacXM
I have a level 5 Athlon with a +2 video card of OpenGL and a +1 bank of memory. Unfortunately, I went to eBay and got saddled with a -3 sound card of Aureal.
Time to play Doom 3. Roll 1d20.
That may be true where the pot is indeed raked. At all of the cardrooms I frequent here in Northern California, they take a time payment instead, which means they truly have no interest at all in the outcome, other than, perhaps, to keep as many butts in the seats as possible.
NOTHING AT ALL!
That's the problem. The casino software can't possibly know that you're not using IM to chat with other players. At least in an offline cardroom they would likely get caught trying to signal.
Even if players don't collude, they have an opportunity to use aids to calculate pot odds and engage in other cheating that they'd have no chance of doing in a real cardroom.
No. Poker is different. The house makes money because they charge a time payment or rake the pot. The house is not involved in the game - they simply supply the venue and the referee (the dealer). That's why you can play Poker in California other than on an Indian reservation.
In Poker, the house has no interest in the outcome (presuming the game is not crooked - that the dealer and a shill are not in cohoots). The house gets their money by raking the pot (taking a percentage) or charging a time payment from one of the players (each hand the person paying rotates). That's why Poker is about the only form of gambling where you as a player have a fair shot (notwithstanding the story of the MIT Blackjack team).
I can't imagine trusting online Poker play. Even if the site/house is honest, players can share information secretly or use aids to calculate pot odds perfectly. They can do that in offline games as well, but it is much more difficult to get away with it.
A Church with a mission statement?! Oy vey!
Whoops! The correct 6to4 default route is 2002:c058:6301::
6to4 is completely autonomous. Because it encodes the IPv4 address of your 6to4 router in your prefix, everyone knows how to get the packets back to you. The only thing that needs to be configured is a default route for reaching non-6to4 destinations. Fortunately, you can simply use 2002:40a8:47d1:: and let RFC 3068 do the work for you. :-)
So there's no reason that anyone can't start using 6to4 immediately, unless they totally lack a public IPv4 address.
This article misses on an opportunity to discuss 6to4, which is a way that anyone with a single static IPv4 address (actually, it doesn't have to be static, but if it is dynamic, then your IPv6 prefix will change whenever it does) can have their own IPv6 /48 today. In fact, it saddens me a bit that Netgear and those bozos haven't made IPv6 support at the very least optional in their little NAT router boxen. Any device that is an IPv4 NAT is in an excellent position to provide IPv6 connectivity (and, of course, firewalling) with 6to4.
Broadcast station call signs are trademarked as a matter of course. The callsign itself, it its sterile "This is K-O-I-T-F-M, San Francisco" sense is one thing, but "You're listening to KOIT (pronounced as one sylable this time), lite rock, less talk" is undoubtedly a trademark.
So how was that "cold war" thing that happened afterwords for you? Did it "work" too?
That's more or less how it works in Canada. By doing the counting at each individual polling place, the individual bits of paper really only matter once, and matter only in a context where their numbers are manageable. Once the numbers at a particular polling place are agreed upon by everyone who bothered to stay, then the election is merely all about insuring that those numbers are all correct all the way up the line. Heck, at that point I could even see using the Internet as a cheap and convenient means of transmitting those numbers to the state election organizing body, so long as they also get written down on paper with autographs and kept secure somewhere at the county level.
But how is your system not still an anonymous vote? Does the ballot have your name or some other piece of information traceable to you on it? Does someone watch you place the "X"? Does someone look at your completed ballot before you stuff it in the box? If the answers to all of those questions are "no," then there is no reason at all to be troubled. If the answers to any of those questions are "yes," then I'd have to wonder why that sort of thing is necessary, except for the obvious reason.
I call "Bullshit" on that.
There was an in depth, independent review of the Florida election after the Supreme Court ruling. Its results may not have reached through the coocoon of bullshit conspiracy hearings that you keep around you. The Chicago Tribune said it best: "The study does not support charges that the U.S. Supreme Court's decision to halt recounts altered the course of history."
Read the article (use bugmenot.com if the registration requirements offend you). If Gore had gotten his way he still would have lost. If Bush had truly gotten his way, he would have lost.