We've seen this story before. Vint Cerf predicted the Internet would crash about 10 years ago. Sky was falling, we're running out of ip addresses... and so on. Well here we are 10 years later and still going strong with probably a few powers of 10 more devices on the net and counting.
Fact is, we're probably still at the beginning. Most centers are running a bunch of machines that are for the most part 99% idle. They also have roughly no more than 50% of their possible storage filled. Yet with cutting edge technology, that will change. Data mining. From conferences I've been at lately they are spending more than ever. A lot on security. Things that require a token, like a badge will come into play in a big way the next 10 years. We'll probably also lose a lot of data as passwords are lost. Either unintentionally or dude leaves for a better job.
"marked by a narrow focus on or display of learning especially its trivial aspects"
This may turn out to be worth your time... keep reading. I know what pendantic means. If I didn't, don't you think I'd look it up? Most people would have understood I knew what you were talking about by my response. Sorry, I gave you too much credit....
(NY Timess being full of BS)
Fine, but it's up to you to demonstrate that it isn't, and you haven't done so and have never admitted you were wrong when provided evidence, like how one of the liver's responsibilities is to clear poisons.
I did. That is why I had no idea where to start. The Liver is the swiss army knife of organs. It can even do functions of other organs if they are deficient. You clearly have no clue how the body works, and you think you do. To say it processes something like something else doesn't impress me one bit. You'll probably never know just how ridiculous what you said is. You fit into the rat poison category that I speak of later in this post.
I also gave you the mechanism of its toxicity (acetaldehyde), which you asked for, and then subsequently ignored.
I didn't ignore it. Sometimes even on slashdot someone has a point and I learn something. You can't know everything after all. For a while I thought you might be right so I looked into it further. Contacted a colleague and he said he knew about the very same article you cited and after about an hour discussion he agreed it was full of shit. Did you by any chance happen to look up acetaldehyde? Look it up - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acetaldehyde . It doesn't cause hangovers by the way. The thing you are depending on (and was lied about in the article you cited), isn't toxic in the normal context. Look for toxic in the article.
Yes, but that doesn't change the fact that it is a toxic chemical. As I already stated, the body can tolerate and clear poisons naturally, and in this case a low dose is acting in a medicinal fashion. Even cyanide has medical uses and is even put in food.
OK FINALLY.. Someone must have hit you with a clue by four (or you re-read my previous posts). At least you have more of a clue than that fellow that found part of the chemical structure for Aspertame has the same chemical structure as rat poison... so therefore it's poison. Conspiracy theory crap. Something can be toxic and not poisonous. Something that is poisonous is always toxic. They are not the same thing.
Unfortunately, some people ignore the science and don't provide an actual scientific refutation, and spout ignorant crap about how the liver doesn't clear poisons, about how they've been drinking for 30 years and highlighting the benefits of a low dose, while ignoring all the harmful effects of a toxic chemical, and ignoring the danger as it applies to the large amounts of fructose that modern people are ingesting via added sugar and fruit juices. This despite fructose's strong link to metabolic syndrome, as demonstrated by the undisputed scientific description of the metabolic process and by actual experiment.
I'm not interested in discussing with you any more. I've said everything I've wanted to say.
I agree, the "some people" are people like you. I bet you are very well intentioned, perhaps very smart. Like so many kids that I see in science fairs, they simply aren't teaching science anymore. Often Science is being taught by a liberal arts major - like an english teacher. Even at a tech school for the county. Very sad.
I think you're right on the edge of understanding why fructose isn't a poison. Do you understand now?
Instead of being pedantic, maybe you'd acknowledge that, unlike alcohol, without ingesting water you'd die, much sooner than you would if you had no food, hence it is not a poison or considered toxic.
Pedantic? Well you are a bit entertaining at least. Remind me of my Son. You called it a nutrient. It isn't and your statement doesn't even address that. You should have said - "You're right." or "agreed" instead of trying to salvage... well something I suppose. Better yet, don't mention water. Stick to the subject at hand.
(.. bit about me drinking for 30 years...)
This statement is ignorant, as the body has a natural ability to clear poisons, and they can be tolerated in low enough doses. However, there's quite a long list of illnesses associated with chronic alcohol abuse, in particular cirrhosis of the liver, and if you actually watched the video I linked to, many of these same illnesses are implicated with fructose.
Where to even begin. You apparently read the article in the NY Times about sugar. Understand that just because it's in print, especially in the NY Times, that doesn't mean it's true.
You read the stuff on ethanol and I think you didn't understand it. If you are not injured, killed nor impared - it's not a poison. Since you cannot show any toxic effects with a small dose, it's not a poison. In fact in low doses they consider it a benefit. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long-term_effects_of_alcohol . So your (actually, it's probably their) assertion that it is, is wrong. Otherwise, explain how a poison can be beneficial. Sure, I read the NYT article. I could show you a whole bunch of un-reproduceable studies by "scientists" in their quest for grants. Unfortunately some end up in the NY Times and believed by people far and wide. Oxygen for example is toxic in too high of a quantity. I don't think many would agree with you that it's poisonous. Just the gullable.
Because unlike water, it is not a necessary nutrient and has toxic effects even at low doses.
Really? Ok, water is many things however it isn't a nutrient. Look at a label sometime for bottled water. Unless it's fortified with something, it should show up as having no nutritional value.
I think you still miss the point. Explain why something that really is a poison, for example anti-freeze or Ethylene glycol is like the way the body handles ethanol, or perhaps how ethanol damages the body in a manner that's consistent with a poison. Since you like wiki, here's one for you http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethanol#Treatment_for_poisoning_by_other_alcohols . Look under poison and see how it's used to help treat a real poisoning. Under http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethylene_glycol it clearly says - It's toxic! I agree, no doubt about it. Not under ethanol. Maybe it would be useful to look at how they define a poison - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poison
If ethanol were a poison, I'd be dead by now. I've been drinking it for over 3 decades.
I'd appreciate it if you would either admit your error or come up with something concrete as to why I'm wrong. I might be. It wouldn't be the first time.
The whole point here is that fructose is processed by the liver very much like alcohol, which is a known poison that leads to disease when chronically over-consumed. Lustig talks about the similarities in processing here.
Please explain why you think alcohol is a poison. I've been consuming alcohol for about 3 decades now. Most assuredly, my liver is fine. Your response is towards my point. Alcohol is metabolized by the liver, it isn't a poison any more than consuming too much water is also a poison. Consuming too much anything can be a poison. Maybe I really did miss something. Slept through something in a biology class. I doubt it though. Of course, that was a long time ago. Maybe with the revised what some call "science" as it is today, it's a poison now.
... especially one that is only defined by a superficial characteristic (I imagine that there are quite a few black people who are seriously offended by the use of the word "nigger" even if it is uttered by another black person), it seems to be largely the social norm that the word is OK to use if you're black, and offensive if you're not. That's a bullshit standard, and it bothers me...
No, They just act offended. Make a big deal because that is what they are taught to do. Sad thing is we pay them any attention.
As for the talk, WE ALL GET THEM. I'm white and I got "the talk", however it had nothing to do with race. It had everything to do with the police thinking someone has something to do with a crime. Hang around a bank and it gets robbed, they are liable to think you have something to do with it. Not rocket science here. People too, they are lazy, come to simple conclusions.
I disagree. Poisons and sugar are very different and processed a lot differently. I think they are imagined poisons the nutrution police would have us believe. It's part of natural food and occurs naturally. Strawberries, Pineapple, and so on. In fact, you need sugar to live. Poisons you don't. Also, kidneys tend to process poisons, not your liver. Your liver matabolizes food. I won't go into that, it would probably gross most people out. It's very important though.
Not sure about Corn syrup. I haven't looked into it yet. However it sure sounds like they are srainin' to do some explainin'
In this case, there is plenty of prior art. Even Walt Disney had future movies out on this in the 1960s. Not that the patent examiner would know or care.
I have two kids that are beyond College age now. Being in the tech industry for the past 30 years I had access to the latest stuff as it came out. Including software. What I didn't get for free (yes, even back in the early 1980s) I bought. I was shocked one day when I opened a file cabinet to clean it out. I must have had a few hundred CDs of all kinds of kid teaching programs.
Ok, Stop reading here if you take blue pills. I'm about to tell you the truth or a red pill.
No, seriously, stop reading unless you think you can handle the truth.
Did they help? NOT AT ALL! "A Palm Pilot will help me keep appointments, notes"... and so on. No, it didn't! Don't buy their crap because kids are often very good manure salesmen. My Son must have sold me a few wagons full. What worked? Good old fashioned learning. Not the crap they alude to in a school. Get the fucking book out, READ IT, do the PROBLEMS! Come back the next day and see if you can still do those problems. That is how your brain works. Doing problems. The harder the subject, the more problems you need to do. I know, sucks. I thought so too. I didn't really understand how to study until I was nearly out of school.
I can also tell you from taking technical courses over the net that you don't retain it. I've taken Cisco courses and so on over the net. 6 months later I might as well take the course again because I'm not going to remember to type in "enable" and all of those other little details. If I had the book like a RedHat manual for example, it's a piece of cake. Comes right back.
The ONLY way I could see it being useful is if it kept track of stuff. For example a math program that would teach, then quiz. Keep track of what they got wrong and allow them to either take the tests again or just the ones they missed. They should also be able to reset to the beginning. Also be able to go back to the lecture/teacher part. Here's how to do it:....bla bla bla. What part didn't they get? Over again.
BTW, my guess is you don't really care. You just want a justification to get your kid a tablet but don't like to shell out yet another $400+. Save your money, get a book instead and work with the kid every day if you really are interested in them learning. Yea, that's the parent part of the deal. You are also not their friend. Make sure you are a parent. They will appreciate it later.
Comrade Lysenko - http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/228752/comrade-lysenko-copenhagen/alex-alexiev . I've seen it in action. I used to work at the World Weather Building in the 1980s. After Clinton became President, Al Gore visited and the very tallented weather men were chased out. They didn't agree with Al and his Man Made Global Warming. As with Lysenko, it's worse now. Even though Man is almost certainly *NOT* causing Global Warming. Nothing to do with God, Nothing to do with conservatism, cold hard scientific facts that the left can't stand. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304636404577291352882984274.html . Makes it harder for them to sham us out of money. Something I'm sure you are in denial about. You're probably a true believer in MMGW.
The Koch brothers don't oppose science, they use it all the time. They make a lot of money with it. The difference is, they know when they are being lied to. Most people don't. Especially on the Nobel Comittee. The runner up when Al Gore got his prize for a SLIDE SHOW - http://monirae.blogspot.com/2008/07/runner-up-for-nobel-prize.html . Then you wonder why people don't believe in science? Not when it's not science anymore. I've also seen a huge decrease in quality in Science Fair projects over the past 30 years. I used to judge them. Lately it might as well be home economics, that's because science even at science and tech schools are mostly tought by liberal arts majors. It's scary, depressing. So many bright minds, right into the crapper!
Live your life. Let your kids live their life. It may turn out to be a curse. If they have it, they may be able to make you live *Forever*. You wouldn't want that, would you? Be careful what you wish for. You may get it.
I've worked for both for over 30 years. Women take things a lot more personally. They also worry that other people think they are stupid or are not up for the job. If you piss them off, you are really screwed. As for better decisions? I think that's a load of BS too. Making better decisions has a lot more to do with their training. Those that understand decision trees and those that haven't a clue. They guess. Which by the way is how a lot of management is done. A guess. Sucks but it's true. Women seem to also get promoted easier above their very qualified male counterparts. Part of affirmative action. So saying that they listen to their help makes sense. Their help is probably better qualified.
Doesn't have to be this way. They could teach how to make desicions better in the workplace. They could also teach how to learn better. I didn't really learn how to learn until I was almost out of college.
Wondered if this was a gag post. Seems crazy. If they brought something back, it should be the Atari ST. I guess the old Atari guys like myself have too much sense to bring it back. Seems the crazy Commodore guys are still fighthing that fight. "We weren't wrong, it was better! See, it's back again!" - Yes, under Linux.
Let's see, Amazon lost entire businesses. Google burped as I recall. Seems to me there have been others. No backup at all in most of these cases. You're screwed. Nothing magical about "Cloud". Just a buzz word for utility computing of a few years ago, only Microsoft is claiming they have a cloud. It's not really. Just a bit of fog. You know, you get all wet and it's very humid (panties in a bunch). Just like you'll be explaining it to a customer when they show you a real cloud.
Market cap. Multiply the shares by the price per share. That's the cap. That should not exceed the value of the company. Where it is right now way exceeds the value, that's why it's psycho (the way a Financial advisor put it to me - "IT'S PSYCHO! JUST PSYCHO!"). Here we are talking about a gadget company. You don't have to have what they make. You have to have Gasoline, as in the case of Exxon Mobile. You have to eat as in the case of companies like General Mills, Kraft, etc.. Apple requires a junior Edison to survive. He's gone and they don't come around very often. Probably 1 in a few billion. Unless they have someone that they are not telling us about, there is one way for the stock to go. Down. Sooner or later, probably sooner. Even if Jobs remained, it would run out sooner or later as well. Even Edison ran out of gas after a while. Just think, what is to stop Microsoft from owning this market, or someone else? Apple could be like last months trash this time next year. For example Blackberry. Just a few years ago they had more money than they could spend. Today they are a has been. Nobody I know wants anything they make. Often that is how I can tell where a sales guy is in the pecking order. Does he still have a Blackberry? HP Could have owned this market, then they shot themself in the foot with that European guy who ran it into the ditch as fast as he could. My opinion is he wanted his golden parachute ASAP! He got it. Too bad, they had a very promissing technology.
What you see is a classic bubble if there ever was one. What made people "invest" in Apple? It certainly wasn't a dividend. P/E is only relevent if you expect a dividend. I know, hard to believe. Otherwise, it's really gambling. There is no rational for buying a stock other than to hope it goes up, down if you think you can short it, or it will pay a dividend. The former is gambling, the later is investing. Gamblers can get rich, very rich. More often they go bust. No doubt some people will make a pile of money on this either way. Most will lose their shirt, if they are lucky. More if they aren't. Don't kid yourself though, it's gambling. BWTHDIK? I'm just yet another slashdot guy. Whatever you do, don't take stock advice from here. You'll either love me (you didn't lose a pile of money) or want to kill me (Stock went way up after this and you lost a pile of money....). No thanks. Do your own research. Do what you think is right.
How have I done in the past? Sure, I've lost my shirt and pants before. I've also killed the market. Over 2500% in just a few days. Those days are long gone. May come around again in 3-5 years, we'll see. That or a real bust. Perhaps a devestating bust if things don't improve. Again, WTHDIK? I'm a working stiff.
The market cap on Apple is way way to high. They are larger than Exxon Mobile and probably a bunch of other companies like IBM combined? No, they aren't. Their stock has been way over valued for a long time. When it falls, I bet it will fall fast and people will be jumping from windows because of their losses. I sold them over a year ago and I'm just amazed it hasn't come crashing down yet. Ready to buy once it hits $10/share.
See those little circles on bumpers since about - 2001! They are ultrasonic sensors and work well. Helped me when a butthead darted in back of my caddy. They are less than $100. Even after market is around $100. It's getting very hard to buy just a car. They all come with way too much crap on them. More crap, more to break, and they do break. Even on the "invincible" toyotas.
Not sure why you think that, 300 baud was slow even for then. They were still around from the 1970s and considered entry level. I had one in 1981, a hayes smart modem at home. Universities and government certainly ran a lot faster than 300 baud. Even public schools had 1200 baud in 1982 for students. I remember in 1982 they took my teletype away, 110 baud. Sucked, it had paper tape. So I had to find a place to read it all back in again.
Keep hearing about Germany. They asked the German scientists about how they came to their knowledge. They said it was all from an American - Robert Goddard. The real pioneer. No doubt, the German scientists deserve and get credit for what they did. Just don't give them too much credit, they don't deserve that.
Sometime also called the lawyer killer. I own one. It's a 1954 E-35 v tail. Almost identical to the one that killed Buddy Holley. It's an undeserved name. The article also has it wrong. Flutter isn't a problem unless you don't follow the manual on control surfaces. The tail cuff bit is because some people were trying aerobatic moves that the airplane wasn't designed for. Fly it like you should, don't get too slow on final, and don't run out of gas (sounds funny I know, but people do it) and it's as safe as any other aircraft. I've flown many different makes and I don't see much of a difference between them flight wise. At least with the airplanes that are 35 years old or more. Some of the new ones I understand are very demanding. So much so that you have to get a factory checkout first.
I used to think that too. Then I hit a BMI of 40 and went to a fat doctor. They showed me a graph of BMI and likelyhood of disease - like Cancer, Diabetes, etc. Up to 40, the graph was low where you could deny what was happening. Close to 0. Once you hit 40, it went towards 1 very fast (probability is between zero and 1). Almost a sure thing. In fact, you see old people, you see fat people. Not many old fat people as the fat doc put it.
I can also tell you that as my BMI came down to where they want it, my medication came down too. I expect to be off medication entirely soon. Same with others that I know that used to be fat. There seems to be something to that BMI. Probably a better indicator as a general measure than anything else I know of.
This is not to say that there isn't junk science out there in the weight industry. I battled weight for almost 25 years. There is a lot of just wrong information out there. Like exercise will lose weight. Sure, if you do it all day long every day for months. Work out on a treadmill and if you are very lucky, you'll lose 300 calories/hour. Expect more like 200/hour. Can of Coke? More than that. Candy bar? Again, more than that. 1 Lbs of fat is 3500 Calories by the way so divide 3500 by 300, even if it were 500 (one mean workout!) and quickly see what a load of crap exercise is for losing weight. Once you stop this exercise even if you were successful in the first place which is very questionable, it will come back. The fat is applied with super glue, or so it seems!
Here's to hoping that you'll never know what it is like to be fat, or a fat slob.
If you are reading this, are fat and wonder how in the world I lost my weight? I did it using the HCG diet. I know, it's a 500 calorie diet and that turns people off like a switch. With the drops I was able to do it and it was close to effortless. I wasn't hungry. No, really. It was a wish come true. Once on the diet, never cheat. It comes off around 1 Lb a day so don't screw it up. It isn't worth it. It really isn't. Simply plan your meals so there is no excuse for not following the diet. Once it's lost, follow the maintenance. You need to change your eating habits and the diet helps that way too. Soon you'll know exactly what you can have and where the line is. I'm to the point that I can predict by what I ate the day before where that scale will be and I'm right most of the time. I can even eat a half a box of girl scout cookies (thin mints) and lose weight. It's all a numbers game. I know a lot of people that have used HCG and it works. So naturally FDA wants to stop it. Recent article on that.
Otherwise, give up, be fat and live to be about 50. I have some friends that didn't even make 50 because of weight. One didn't even make 40.
I tried to use it over a decade ago. Even other guys that were into encryption with the exception of one guy found it to hard to deal with. Anyone outside of a computers science background, FUGETABOUTIT! I might as well as to go to the moon.
Besides, what's so secret anyhow? Someone might know I'm having family over for Thanksgiving or I blew a Mustang away with my Caddy?
What's really surprising to me is how few people use encryption between machines with mail (sendmail). It's easy to do, yet so many people won't do it. Just set up the certificate and away it goes!
Slashdot Mirror
We've seen this story before. Vint Cerf predicted the Internet would crash about 10 years ago. Sky was falling, we're running out of ip addresses... and so on. Well here we are 10 years later and still going strong with probably a few powers of 10 more devices on the net and counting.
Fact is, we're probably still at the beginning. Most centers are running a bunch of machines that are for the most part 99% idle. They also have roughly no more than 50% of their possible storage filled. Yet with cutting edge technology, that will change. Data mining. From conferences I've been at lately they are spending more than ever. A lot on security. Things that require a token, like a badge will come into play in a big way the next 10 years. We'll probably also lose a lot of data as passwords are lost. Either unintentionally or dude leaves for a better job.
"marked by a narrow focus on or display of learning especially its trivial aspects"
This may turn out to be worth your time... keep reading. I know what pendantic means. If I didn't, don't you think I'd look it up? Most people would have understood I knew what you were talking about by my response. Sorry, I gave you too much credit. ...
(NY Timess being full of BS)
Fine, but it's up to you to demonstrate that it isn't, and you haven't done so and have never admitted you were wrong when provided evidence, like how one of the liver's responsibilities is to clear poisons.
I did. That is why I had no idea where to start. The Liver is the swiss army knife of organs. It can even do functions of other organs if they are deficient. You clearly have no clue how the body works, and you think you do. To say it processes something like something else doesn't impress me one bit. You'll probably never know just how ridiculous what you said is. You fit into the rat poison category that I speak of later in this post.
I also gave you the mechanism of its toxicity (acetaldehyde), which you asked for, and then subsequently ignored.
I didn't ignore it. Sometimes even on slashdot someone has a point and I learn something. You can't know everything after all. For a while I thought you might be right so I looked into it further. Contacted a colleague and he said he knew about the very same article you cited and after about an hour discussion he agreed it was full of shit. Did you by any chance happen to look up acetaldehyde? Look it up - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acetaldehyde . It doesn't cause hangovers by the way. The thing you are depending on (and was lied about in the article you cited), isn't toxic in the normal context. Look for toxic in the article.
Yes, but that doesn't change the fact that it is a toxic chemical. As I already stated, the body can tolerate and clear poisons naturally, and in this case a low dose is acting in a medicinal fashion. Even cyanide has medical uses and is even put in food.
OK FINALLY.. Someone must have hit you with a clue by four (or you re-read my previous posts). At least you have more of a clue than that fellow that found part of the chemical structure for Aspertame has the same chemical structure as rat poison... so therefore it's poison. Conspiracy theory crap. Something can be toxic and not poisonous. Something that is poisonous is always toxic. They are not the same thing.
Unfortunately, some people ignore the science and don't provide an actual scientific refutation, and spout ignorant crap about how the liver doesn't clear poisons, about how they've been drinking for 30 years and highlighting the benefits of a low dose, while ignoring all the harmful effects of a toxic chemical, and ignoring the danger as it applies to the large amounts of fructose that modern people are ingesting via added sugar and fruit juices. This despite fructose's strong link to metabolic syndrome, as demonstrated by the undisputed scientific description of the metabolic process and by actual experiment.
I'm not interested in discussing with you any more. I've said everything I've wanted to say.
I agree, the "some people" are people like you. I bet you are very well intentioned, perhaps very smart. Like so many kids that I see in science fairs, they simply aren't teaching science anymore. Often Science is being taught by a liberal arts major - like an english teacher. Even at a tech school for the county. Very sad.
I think you're right on the edge of understanding why fructose isn't a poison. Do you understand now?
Instead of being pedantic, maybe you'd acknowledge that, unlike alcohol, without ingesting water you'd die, much sooner than you would if you had no food, hence it is not a poison or considered toxic.
Pedantic? Well you are a bit entertaining at least. Remind me of my Son. You called it a nutrient. It isn't and your statement doesn't even address that. You should have said - "You're right." or "agreed" instead of trying to salvage... well something I suppose. Better yet, don't mention water. Stick to the subject at hand.
(.. bit about me drinking for 30 years...)
This statement is ignorant, as the body has a natural ability to clear poisons, and they can be tolerated in low enough doses. However, there's quite a long list of illnesses associated with chronic alcohol abuse, in particular cirrhosis of the liver, and if you actually watched the video I linked to, many of these same illnesses are implicated with fructose.
Where to even begin. You apparently read the article in the NY Times about sugar. Understand that just because it's in print, especially in the NY Times, that doesn't mean it's true.
You read the stuff on ethanol and I think you didn't understand it. If you are not injured, killed nor impared - it's not a poison. Since you cannot show any toxic effects with a small dose, it's not a poison. In fact in low doses they consider it a benefit. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long-term_effects_of_alcohol . So your (actually, it's probably their) assertion that it is, is wrong. Otherwise, explain how a poison can be beneficial. Sure, I read the NYT article. I could show you a whole bunch of un-reproduceable studies by "scientists" in their quest for grants. Unfortunately some end up in the NY Times and believed by people far and wide. Oxygen for example is toxic in too high of a quantity. I don't think many would agree with you that it's poisonous. Just the gullable.
Because unlike water, it is not a necessary nutrient and has toxic effects even at low doses.
Really? Ok, water is many things however it isn't a nutrient. Look at a label sometime for bottled water. Unless it's fortified with something, it should show up as having no nutritional value.
I think you still miss the point. Explain why something that really is a poison, for example anti-freeze or Ethylene glycol is like the way the body handles ethanol, or perhaps how ethanol damages the body in a manner that's consistent with a poison. Since you like wiki, here's one for you http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethanol#Treatment_for_poisoning_by_other_alcohols . Look under poison and see how it's used to help treat a real poisoning. Under http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethylene_glycol it clearly says - It's toxic! I agree, no doubt about it. Not under ethanol. Maybe it would be useful to look at how they define a poison - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poison
If ethanol were a poison, I'd be dead by now. I've been drinking it for over 3 decades.
I'd appreciate it if you would either admit your error or come up with something concrete as to why I'm wrong. I might be. It wouldn't be the first time.
The whole point here is that fructose is processed by the liver very much like alcohol, which is a known poison that leads to disease when chronically over-consumed. Lustig talks about the similarities in processing here.
Please explain why you think alcohol is a poison. I've been consuming alcohol for about 3 decades now. Most assuredly, my liver is fine. Your response is towards my point. Alcohol is metabolized by the liver, it isn't a poison any more than consuming too much water is also a poison. Consuming too much anything can be a poison. Maybe I really did miss something. Slept through something in a biology class. I doubt it though. Of course, that was a long time ago. Maybe with the revised what some call "science" as it is today, it's a poison now.
... especially one that is only defined by a superficial characteristic (I imagine that there are quite a few black people who are seriously offended by the use of the word "nigger" even if it is uttered by another black person), it seems to be largely the social norm that the word is OK to use if you're black, and offensive if you're not. That's a bullshit standard, and it bothers me...
No, They just act offended. Make a big deal because that is what they are taught to do. Sad thing is we pay them any attention.
As for the talk, WE ALL GET THEM. I'm white and I got "the talk", however it had nothing to do with race. It had everything to do with the police thinking someone has something to do with a crime. Hang around a bank and it gets robbed, they are liable to think you have something to do with it. Not rocket science here. People too, they are lazy, come to simple conclusions.
Seems like Vista just came out!
I disagree. Poisons and sugar are very different and processed a lot differently. I think they are imagined poisons the nutrution police would have us believe. It's part of natural food and occurs naturally. Strawberries, Pineapple, and so on. In fact, you need sugar to live. Poisons you don't. Also, kidneys tend to process poisons, not your liver. Your liver matabolizes food. I won't go into that, it would probably gross most people out. It's very important though.
Not sure about Corn syrup. I haven't looked into it yet. However it sure sounds like they are srainin' to do some explainin'
In this case, there is plenty of prior art. Even Walt Disney had future movies out on this in the 1960s. Not that the patent examiner would know or care.
Maybe I'm just paranoid. Maybe they are helping so they can come back in 10 years and claim the code was stolen?
I have two kids that are beyond College age now. Being in the tech industry for the past 30 years I had access to the latest stuff as it came out. Including software. What I didn't get for free (yes, even back in the early 1980s) I bought. I was shocked one day when I opened a file cabinet to clean it out. I must have had a few hundred CDs of all kinds of kid teaching programs.
Ok, Stop reading here if you take blue pills. I'm about to tell you the truth or a red pill.
No, seriously, stop reading unless you think you can handle the truth.
Did they help? NOT AT ALL! "A Palm Pilot will help me keep appointments, notes"... and so on. No, it didn't! Don't buy their crap because kids are often very good manure salesmen. My Son must have sold me a few wagons full. What worked? Good old fashioned learning. Not the crap they alude to in a school. Get the fucking book out, READ IT, do the PROBLEMS! Come back the next day and see if you can still do those problems. That is how your brain works. Doing problems. The harder the subject, the more problems you need to do. I know, sucks. I thought so too. I didn't really understand how to study until I was nearly out of school.
I can also tell you from taking technical courses over the net that you don't retain it. I've taken Cisco courses and so on over the net. 6 months later I might as well take the course again because I'm not going to remember to type in "enable" and all of those other little details. If I had the book like a RedHat manual for example, it's a piece of cake. Comes right back.
The ONLY way I could see it being useful is if it kept track of stuff. For example a math program that would teach, then quiz. Keep track of what they got wrong and allow them to either take the tests again or just the ones they missed. They should also be able to reset to the beginning. Also be able to go back to the lecture/teacher part. Here's how to do it:....bla bla bla. What part didn't they get? Over again.
BTW, my guess is you don't really care. You just want a justification to get your kid a tablet but don't like to shell out yet another $400+. Save your money, get a book instead and work with the kid every day if you really are interested in them learning. Yea, that's the parent part of the deal. You are also not their friend. Make sure you are a parent. They will appreciate it later.
Comrade Lysenko - http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/228752/comrade-lysenko-copenhagen/alex-alexiev . I've seen it in action. I used to work at the World Weather Building in the 1980s. After Clinton became President, Al Gore visited and the very tallented weather men were chased out. They didn't agree with Al and his Man Made Global Warming. As with Lysenko, it's worse now. Even though Man is almost certainly *NOT* causing Global Warming. Nothing to do with God, Nothing to do with conservatism, cold hard scientific facts that the left can't stand. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304636404577291352882984274.html . Makes it harder for them to sham us out of money. Something I'm sure you are in denial about. You're probably a true believer in MMGW.
The Koch brothers don't oppose science, they use it all the time. They make a lot of money with it. The difference is, they know when they are being lied to. Most people don't. Especially on the Nobel Comittee. The runner up when Al Gore got his prize for a SLIDE SHOW - http://monirae.blogspot.com/2008/07/runner-up-for-nobel-prize.html . Then you wonder why people don't believe in science? Not when it's not science anymore. I've also seen a huge decrease in quality in Science Fair projects over the past 30 years. I used to judge them. Lately it might as well be home economics, that's because science even at science and tech schools are mostly tought by liberal arts majors. It's scary, depressing. So many bright minds, right into the crapper!
Live your life. Let your kids live their life. It may turn out to be a curse. If they have it, they may be able to make you live *Forever*. You wouldn't want that, would you? Be careful what you wish for. You may get it.
I've worked for both for over 30 years. Women take things a lot more personally. They also worry that other people think they are stupid or are not up for the job. If you piss them off, you are really screwed. As for better decisions? I think that's a load of BS too. Making better decisions has a lot more to do with their training. Those that understand decision trees and those that haven't a clue. They guess. Which by the way is how a lot of management is done. A guess. Sucks but it's true. Women seem to also get promoted easier above their very qualified male counterparts. Part of affirmative action. So saying that they listen to their help makes sense. Their help is probably better qualified.
Doesn't have to be this way. They could teach how to make desicions better in the workplace. They could also teach how to learn better. I didn't really learn how to learn until I was almost out of college.
Wondered if this was a gag post. Seems crazy. If they brought something back, it should be the Atari ST. I guess the old Atari guys like myself have too much sense to bring it back. Seems the crazy Commodore guys are still fighthing that fight. "We weren't wrong, it was better! See, it's back again!" - Yes, under Linux.
Let's see, Amazon lost entire businesses. Google burped as I recall. Seems to me there have been others. No backup at all in most of these cases. You're screwed. Nothing magical about "Cloud". Just a buzz word for utility computing of a few years ago, only Microsoft is claiming they have a cloud. It's not really. Just a bit of fog. You know, you get all wet and it's very humid (panties in a bunch). Just like you'll be explaining it to a customer when they show you a real cloud.
Market cap. Multiply the shares by the price per share. That's the cap. That should not exceed the value of the company. Where it is right now way exceeds the value, that's why it's psycho (the way a Financial advisor put it to me - "IT'S PSYCHO! JUST PSYCHO!"). Here we are talking about a gadget company. You don't have to have what they make. You have to have Gasoline, as in the case of Exxon Mobile. You have to eat as in the case of companies like General Mills, Kraft, etc.. Apple requires a junior Edison to survive. He's gone and they don't come around very often. Probably 1 in a few billion. Unless they have someone that they are not telling us about, there is one way for the stock to go. Down. Sooner or later, probably sooner. Even if Jobs remained, it would run out sooner or later as well. Even Edison ran out of gas after a while. Just think, what is to stop Microsoft from owning this market, or someone else? Apple could be like last months trash this time next year. For example Blackberry. Just a few years ago they had more money than they could spend. Today they are a has been. Nobody I know wants anything they make. Often that is how I can tell where a sales guy is in the pecking order. Does he still have a Blackberry? HP Could have owned this market, then they shot themself in the foot with that European guy who ran it into the ditch as fast as he could. My opinion is he wanted his golden parachute ASAP! He got it. Too bad, they had a very promissing technology.
What you see is a classic bubble if there ever was one. What made people "invest" in Apple? It certainly wasn't a dividend. P/E is only relevent if you expect a dividend. I know, hard to believe. Otherwise, it's really gambling. There is no rational for buying a stock other than to hope it goes up, down if you think you can short it, or it will pay a dividend. The former is gambling, the later is investing. Gamblers can get rich, very rich. More often they go bust. No doubt some people will make a pile of money on this either way. Most will lose their shirt, if they are lucky. More if they aren't. Don't kid yourself though, it's gambling. BWTHDIK? I'm just yet another slashdot guy. Whatever you do, don't take stock advice from here. You'll either love me (you didn't lose a pile of money) or want to kill me (Stock went way up after this and you lost a pile of money....). No thanks. Do your own research. Do what you think is right.
How have I done in the past? Sure, I've lost my shirt and pants before. I've also killed the market. Over 2500% in just a few days. Those days are long gone. May come around again in 3-5 years, we'll see. That or a real bust. Perhaps a devestating bust if things don't improve. Again, WTHDIK? I'm a working stiff.
The market cap on Apple is way way to high. They are larger than Exxon Mobile and probably a bunch of other companies like IBM combined? No, they aren't. Their stock has been way over valued for a long time. When it falls, I bet it will fall fast and people will be jumping from windows because of their losses. I sold them over a year ago and I'm just amazed it hasn't come crashing down yet. Ready to buy once it hits $10/share.
A lot of agencies, even now STILL use XP. I know of at least one agency that STILL uses Lotus NOTES! 2001 called, they want their OS back.
See those little circles on bumpers since about - 2001! They are ultrasonic sensors and work well. Helped me when a butthead darted in back of my caddy. They are less than $100. Even after market is around $100. It's getting very hard to buy just a car. They all come with way too much crap on them. More crap, more to break, and they do break. Even on the "invincible" toyotas.
Not sure why you think that, 300 baud was slow even for then. They were still around from the 1970s and considered entry level. I had one in 1981, a hayes smart modem at home. Universities and government certainly ran a lot faster than 300 baud. Even public schools had 1200 baud in 1982 for students. I remember in 1982 they took my teletype away, 110 baud. Sucked, it had paper tape. So I had to find a place to read it all back in again.
Keep hearing about Germany. They asked the German scientists about how they came to their knowledge. They said it was all from an American - Robert Goddard. The real pioneer. No doubt, the German scientists deserve and get credit for what they did. Just don't give them too much credit, they don't deserve that.
Sometime also called the lawyer killer. I own one. It's a 1954 E-35 v tail. Almost identical to the one that killed Buddy Holley. It's an undeserved name. The article also has it wrong. Flutter isn't a problem unless you don't follow the manual on control surfaces. The tail cuff bit is because some people were trying aerobatic moves that the airplane wasn't designed for. Fly it like you should, don't get too slow on final, and don't run out of gas (sounds funny I know, but people do it) and it's as safe as any other aircraft. I've flown many different makes and I don't see much of a difference between them flight wise. At least with the airplanes that are 35 years old or more. Some of the new ones I understand are very demanding. So much so that you have to get a factory checkout first.
I used to think that too. Then I hit a BMI of 40 and went to a fat doctor. They showed me a graph of BMI and likelyhood of disease - like Cancer, Diabetes, etc. Up to 40, the graph was low where you could deny what was happening. Close to 0. Once you hit 40, it went towards 1 very fast (probability is between zero and 1). Almost a sure thing. In fact, you see old people, you see fat people. Not many old fat people as the fat doc put it.
I can also tell you that as my BMI came down to where they want it, my medication came down too. I expect to be off medication entirely soon. Same with others that I know that used to be fat. There seems to be something to that BMI. Probably a better indicator as a general measure than anything else I know of.
This is not to say that there isn't junk science out there in the weight industry. I battled weight for almost 25 years. There is a lot of just wrong information out there. Like exercise will lose weight. Sure, if you do it all day long every day for months. Work out on a treadmill and if you are very lucky, you'll lose 300 calories/hour. Expect more like 200/hour. Can of Coke? More than that. Candy bar? Again, more than that. 1 Lbs of fat is 3500 Calories by the way so divide 3500 by 300, even if it were 500 (one mean workout!) and quickly see what a load of crap exercise is for losing weight. Once you stop this exercise even if you were successful in the first place which is very questionable, it will come back. The fat is applied with super glue, or so it seems!
Here's to hoping that you'll never know what it is like to be fat, or a fat slob.
If you are reading this, are fat and wonder how in the world I lost my weight? I did it using the HCG diet. I know, it's a 500 calorie diet and that turns people off like a switch. With the drops I was able to do it and it was close to effortless. I wasn't hungry. No, really. It was a wish come true. Once on the diet, never cheat. It comes off around 1 Lb a day so don't screw it up. It isn't worth it. It really isn't. Simply plan your meals so there is no excuse for not following the diet. Once it's lost, follow the maintenance. You need to change your eating habits and the diet helps that way too. Soon you'll know exactly what you can have and where the line is. I'm to the point that I can predict by what I ate the day before where that scale will be and I'm right most of the time. I can even eat a half a box of girl scout cookies (thin mints) and lose weight. It's all a numbers game. I know a lot of people that have used HCG and it works. So naturally FDA wants to stop it. Recent article on that.
Otherwise, give up, be fat and live to be about 50. I have some friends that didn't even make 50 because of weight. One didn't even make 40.
I tried to use it over a decade ago. Even other guys that were into encryption with the exception of one guy found it to hard to deal with. Anyone outside of a computers science background, FUGETABOUTIT! I might as well as to go to the moon. Besides, what's so secret anyhow? Someone might know I'm having family over for Thanksgiving or I blew a Mustang away with my Caddy? What's really surprising to me is how few people use encryption between machines with mail (sendmail). It's easy to do, yet so many people won't do it. Just set up the certificate and away it goes!