seriously?? People actually believe this pseudo science? While I agree that different people react differently to different foods (obviously) the notion that it's tied to blood type is absolutely no proven. BTW I'm A+ and I have no negative reactions to meat.
Even if all of your assertions are 100% correct, there's no provable causal link. So one wild-ass hypothesis is just as useful as another. I know plenty of hippie-dippy parents that do the whole cloth diaper, no GMO, all organic crap. More power to 'em. But some of those little bastards have allergies, too. I know the plural of anecdote is not data, but I just don't see any evidence pointing towards some silver bullet cure like "go outside and eat dirt" or "avoid MSG" or whatever.
Wow, cool! Thank you for the information. I'll share it with the allergist (as soon as I'm done fighting the insurance company). I'd be too scared to try this on my own, but in a hospital setting, it would be safer.
OK. So I have two kids. Both of them were raised essentially the same way. If anything, the younger was coddled more, and spent less time in daycare. Yet the elder has severe dairy allergy, and the younger has none. My brother and I grew up in the same house exposed to the same pets, playing in the same dirt. I am allergic to cats now. He is not. My wife has peanut allergy; her sister does not. The list could go on, but you get my point.
Are you really implying that people should feed their kids food they're allergic to? "Well son, sure you can't breathe and you're covered in hives, but at least Gothmolly doesn't think you're a pussy!"
Do you really think it's as simple as "go play in dirt and you won't get allergies"? I've got a different unsupported hypothesis pulled out of my ass. The reason why more sanitary countries have more allergies is because in the developing world, the people with allergies don't live long enough to pass their genes down to the next generation. Had I been born in some third world country, I would have died before I turned 10 due to respiratory problems.
How bad was her allergy to start with? My son's is so bad that he even has a topical response if he touches dairy. He's got peanut allergy at the same level, too. That's what I don't understand about these studies. If my son walks into a room with peanut shells on the floor he starts having trouble breathing. If some kid spills a milkshake he gets hives all over the place. I just don't see how 1/70th of a peanut would be OK. Maybe 1/700th?
I don't know about you, but the hundreds of thousands (150-250k, depending on your source). of civilians killed in Iraq and Afghanistan counts as "mass slaughter of innocent people" in my book. Granted, we're only directly responsible for a portion of them, but at some point it stops being collateral damage associated a lawful act of war, and starts becoming a war crime.
People are forming opinions then sticking to them like sports teams. Nuance is out, and so seem to be reassessment and compromise.
I am firmly of the opinion that people do not stick to their opinions like sports teams. And if you try to tell me I'm wrong, I'll punch you in the throat.
Houston shut down twice in the past week. The first time there was ice aplenty, and hundreds of cars slamming into guardrails. The second time there was no ice, but you didn't hear people bitching about "crying wolf." They learned their lesson the first time. You do the best with the information you have. Slow the hell down, and avoid overpasses. If the officials make the wrong call, and you lose a day's pay? Well, fine, it's still cheaper than totaling your car and a trip to the ER.
In Atlanta, some of the forecasters were calling for 1 to 2 inches. Even if there was just a 20% chance of snow, they should have had the salt trucks (all 40 or 50 of them that they have) in the city proper, hitting the overpasses BEFORE the clusterfuck. Not waiting for the gridlock in the afternoon, and not halfway to Macon. Doesn't do anybody any good if the salt truck is stuck in the traffic they were supposed to prevent.
Well, that mentality doesn't seem to bother shipping companies. They've been indirectly bankrolling pirates for a decade now.
Fighting a mugger is even more pointless than not paying a pirate. You're not protecting anybody if you know you're going to get your ass whupped anyway. AND they still get your wallet.
Also, it puts the woman in an unfair position: if she can't provide for the child on her own and the man won't support her, her only option becomes abortion which is a medical procedure with costs and a certain degree of risk to her.
Or as others have pointed out on this forum, drop the baby off at a fire station. Although you're right, it still puts the mother at financial and physical risk.
Education benefits from parental involvement. A sperm donor would be depriving the children of those useful resources.
You are delusional if you think that two lesbian women would necessarily be depriving their child of the useful resources of education and parental involvement.
I read somewhere that the couple split and the biological mom was left holding the bag. So in this particular case, the kid is absolutely getting deprived of some available resources. That is exactly what the state is trying to remedy, but they went after the wrong "parent." Arguably, if Kansas had legalized gay marriage, then it would have been a little easier to figure out who should be paying child support after the split.
This is about someone who just could not put down recoding device in enviroment [sic] in which it is big issue.
If recording in this environment were such a big issue, the manager should have brought it to his attention in a civilized manner. Better yet, the ticket sellers/ripper-uppers should be trained to POLITELY ask people to remove Glass or any other recording device.
As for the rest of your dystopia, if everybody is recorded all of the time, the novelty/fear of it, and the associated taboos will eventually become blah. OMG that guy likes to @$!%!# with a @$!$%%@#! Oh wait, so do a lot of people, and they put it on Youtube.
Or lets say your "some nice man" tries to blackmail you. Well, you just put the video of the attempted blackmail up on Youtube! Instant celebrity. "Oh no, Mr. Niceman, you want to tell my boss that I smoked marijuana in college?!" Oh right, in this "dystopia" everybody's "embarrassing" details are available for all to see, so... won't my boss already know that? Besides, blackmail is already illegal and possible. So, how does Glass make it any better or worse?
I remember reading Brave New World and thinking that some of the more "obscene" aspects were actually kind of cool. I have read utopian short stories where I thought, "now why would anyone want to live there?" Different cultures think somethings are taboo, while other people's taboos have no sway. What you think is a freaking nightmare, I find mildly interesting, and possibly quite nice.
RTFA. Yes, they were prescription. No, he didn't have any other prescription glasses available. He had worn Glass to this theater without problems before.
It's hard to see through the bullshit, but not impossible. I certainly wouldn't send my child to a school run by evangelicals. I grew up in a right-wing religious nut-job household, and I turned out OK. I owe most of this to my wife, and my college roommate helped quite a bit, too. Don't get me wrong, I was/am a little quirky, and I don't have some of the cultural touchstones of my peers (MTV and the Smurfs were anathema). But I am an engineer, a scientist, a rational-thinker (for the most part).
I started out at a "Jesus Camp"-level crazy private school. Luckily I got into the public school system before any real science "education" could take place. (There were good things about spending four years at a church school. We had a church service, complete with 15 minutes of praise and worship music every morning. By the time I was 7, I could improvise harmonies and counter-melodies.)
But that easily could have gone differently. Had I stayed in that school through to junior high or high school, there's no telling how warped I would have been. I know this is America and freedom of religion, and all that, but I don't want my tax dollars being used to brainwash innocent little kids. I did a little digging, and this school system in the story has a campus near my church. It's located inside the nut-job church one block away. How shocking to learn that my tax dollars are going to pay for this "school." The sad part is, the education facility run by my church is really struggling, precisely because they won't play these dishonest games to garner state funds. Oh the irony.
I think in this case we can use the term "literally" rather than "ironic." This is "literally like calling the FAA because you got hit by a paper airplane."
To use "literally" (which indicates a non-figurative statement) in conjunction with "like" (which indicates the figurative form called simile) defies logic. "Literally" is not a flavoring word to be bandied about for emphasis. Or perhaps you were literally being ironic.
Very true. We had to catch a red-eye out of Vegas one time on the way back from Hawaii. Man, that was rough. There was a bachelor party that boarded just before we took off. The flight attendant did the best she could, but every half hour or so, she'd have to go back there and hush them up. Here I was thinking my 2 year old was going to be the loud one on the flight, but he slept like a... well, you know.
You realize this happens on planes already, right? People are loud, rude, obnoxious, drink-spilling, stinky, barfing, etc. on airplanes all the time.
I was flying back from Canada, and the guy in the next seat was buying booze for the whole row. It was a night flight (not a red-eye), and we were a little loud. Not rowdy, mind you, just a little animated. You know what happens when somebody gets loud on a plane? The flight attendant asks you to be more quiet and respectful of the other passengers. It only takes one such warning to settle down, because there is the implied threat of getting detained at landing if you don't shut the hell up right now (especially on an international flight where your constitution rights can pretty much be disregarded).
They are using the word "rational" to describe a specific, common-sense-to-humans, transitive property of preferences. That is all. You are reading way to much into their choice of words. The whole point of evolution by natural selection is that certain traits emerge because they are adaptive. What this paper sets out to show is that the behavior we see is not "rational" in the common sense, but it is still adaptive. It did not evolve "due to an absurd amount of chaos." They're basically arguing that long-term adaptivity trumps short-term logic.
Really there's a pretty good allegory to human behavior here. People frequently prefer to do things that are not in their long-term best interest, because they only think about their short-term best interest. Eating your second-favorite chocolate first could lead to your wife only buying milk chocolate, since you obviously like it better. Shooting the guy in the row in front of you might seem like a good way to get him to stop texting, but it's a terrible way to enjoy the rest of your movie. Faking being in the CIA might sound like a great way to get a nice paid vacation, but you will eventually get busted. Groups of people (think governments) are particularly bad at this, too. If I list any examples, I'll get modded as flamebait, but I'm sure you can think of several.
Another Florida officer named Curtis Reeves shot and killed a teenager for looting. But it couldn't be the same guy because the ages don't add up. This guy was 33 in '82, making him 64 now. By 1982 he already had two dozen complaints against him, including 8 write-ups. You'd think after the first few, he would have had some sort of actual punishment. Not exactly a squeaky clean record. Who knows, maybe it is the same guy, just a wrong age in one article or the other?
Slashdot Mirror
seriously?? People actually believe this pseudo science? While I agree that different people react differently to different foods (obviously) the notion that it's tied to blood type is absolutely no proven. BTW I'm A+ and I have no negative reactions to meat.
Even if all of your assertions are 100% correct, there's no provable causal link. So one wild-ass hypothesis is just as useful as another. I know plenty of hippie-dippy parents that do the whole cloth diaper, no GMO, all organic crap. More power to 'em. But some of those little bastards have allergies, too. I know the plural of anecdote is not data, but I just don't see any evidence pointing towards some silver bullet cure like "go outside and eat dirt" or "avoid MSG" or whatever.
Wow, cool! Thank you for the information. I'll share it with the allergist (as soon as I'm done fighting the insurance company). I'd be too scared to try this on my own, but in a hospital setting, it would be safer.
OK. So I have two kids. Both of them were raised essentially the same way. If anything, the younger was coddled more, and spent less time in daycare. Yet the elder has severe dairy allergy, and the younger has none. My brother and I grew up in the same house exposed to the same pets, playing in the same dirt. I am allergic to cats now. He is not. My wife has peanut allergy; her sister does not. The list could go on, but you get my point.
Are you really implying that people should feed their kids food they're allergic to? "Well son, sure you can't breathe and you're covered in hives, but at least Gothmolly doesn't think you're a pussy!"
Do you really think it's as simple as "go play in dirt and you won't get allergies"? I've got a different unsupported hypothesis pulled out of my ass. The reason why more sanitary countries have more allergies is because in the developing world, the people with allergies don't live long enough to pass their genes down to the next generation. Had I been born in some third world country, I would have died before I turned 10 due to respiratory problems.
How bad was her allergy to start with? My son's is so bad that he even has a topical response if he touches dairy. He's got peanut allergy at the same level, too. That's what I don't understand about these studies. If my son walks into a room with peanut shells on the floor he starts having trouble breathing. If some kid spills a milkshake he gets hives all over the place. I just don't see how 1/70th of a peanut would be OK. Maybe 1/700th?
"Either you're with us, or you're against us." -- hardly invented by G. W. Bush
"Whoever is not against us is for us" -- Jesus of Nazareth
I don't know about you, but the hundreds of thousands (150-250k, depending on your source). of civilians killed in Iraq and Afghanistan counts as "mass slaughter of innocent people" in my book. Granted, we're only directly responsible for a portion of them, but at some point it stops being collateral damage associated a lawful act of war, and starts becoming a war crime.
People are forming opinions then sticking to them like sports teams. Nuance is out, and so seem to be reassessment and compromise.
I am firmly of the opinion that people do not stick to their opinions like sports teams. And if you try to tell me I'm wrong, I'll punch you in the throat.
Houston shut down twice in the past week. The first time there was ice aplenty, and hundreds of cars slamming into guardrails. The second time there was no ice, but you didn't hear people bitching about "crying wolf." They learned their lesson the first time. You do the best with the information you have. Slow the hell down, and avoid overpasses. If the officials make the wrong call, and you lose a day's pay? Well, fine, it's still cheaper than totaling your car and a trip to the ER.
In Atlanta, some of the forecasters were calling for 1 to 2 inches. Even if there was just a 20% chance of snow, they should have had the salt trucks (all 40 or 50 of them that they have) in the city proper, hitting the overpasses BEFORE the clusterfuck. Not waiting for the gridlock in the afternoon, and not halfway to Macon. Doesn't do anybody any good if the salt truck is stuck in the traffic they were supposed to prevent.
Fighting a mugger is even more pointless than not paying a pirate. You're not protecting anybody if you know you're going to get your ass whupped anyway. AND they still get your wallet.
Obviously this could never happen, because the video from stolenmovies.com would have the evil bit set per RFC3514. Duh.
Also, it puts the woman in an unfair position: if she can't provide for the child on her own and the man won't support her, her only option becomes abortion which is a medical procedure with costs and a certain degree of risk to her.
Or as others have pointed out on this forum, drop the baby off at a fire station. Although you're right, it still puts the mother at financial and physical risk.
Education benefits from parental involvement. A sperm donor would be depriving the children of those useful resources.
You are delusional if you think that two lesbian women would necessarily be depriving their child of the useful resources of education and parental involvement.
I read somewhere that the couple split and the biological mom was left holding the bag. So in this particular case, the kid is absolutely getting deprived of some available resources. That is exactly what the state is trying to remedy, but they went after the wrong "parent." Arguably, if Kansas had legalized gay marriage, then it would have been a little easier to figure out who should be paying child support after the split.
A: Boss.
Slightly off topic, but have you ever checked out the ingredients for the NyQuil sleep aid, ZzzQuil? It's just Benadryl.
This is about someone who just could not put down recoding device in enviroment [sic] in which it is big issue.
If recording in this environment were such a big issue, the manager should have brought it to his attention in a civilized manner. Better yet, the ticket sellers/ripper-uppers should be trained to POLITELY ask people to remove Glass or any other recording device.
As for the rest of your dystopia, if everybody is recorded all of the time, the novelty/fear of it, and the associated taboos will eventually become blah. OMG that guy likes to @$!%!# with a @$!$%%@#! Oh wait, so do a lot of people, and they put it on Youtube.
Or lets say your "some nice man" tries to blackmail you. Well, you just put the video of the attempted blackmail up on Youtube! Instant celebrity. "Oh no, Mr. Niceman, you want to tell my boss that I smoked marijuana in college?!" Oh right, in this "dystopia" everybody's "embarrassing" details are available for all to see, so... won't my boss already know that? Besides, blackmail is already illegal and possible. So, how does Glass make it any better or worse?
I remember reading Brave New World and thinking that some of the more "obscene" aspects were actually kind of cool. I have read utopian short stories where I thought, "now why would anyone want to live there?" Different cultures think somethings are taboo, while other people's taboos have no sway. What you think is a freaking nightmare, I find mildly interesting, and possibly quite nice.
PS sorry for all the "scare" quotes.
Probably because it's the nearest movie theater to his house, and he still likes to see movies more than he dislikes the hassle.
RTFA. Yes, they were prescription. No, he didn't have any other prescription glasses available. He had worn Glass to this theater without problems before.
As to the "pause" being a statistical artifact, warming has in fact flattened for about fifteen years so far - despite CO2 being at record levels. We'll see how long it continues, we're right at solar maximum currently and looking at a long stretch of low solar activity ahead. So, the next 20-40 years should give us a true concrete idea of how a solar Grand Minimum effects the climate.
The real reason for this pause in global warming is the increased incidence of piracy since the 90s. Ramen!
It's hard to see through the bullshit, but not impossible. I certainly wouldn't send my child to a school run by evangelicals. I grew up in a right-wing religious nut-job household, and I turned out OK. I owe most of this to my wife, and my college roommate helped quite a bit, too. Don't get me wrong, I was/am a little quirky, and I don't have some of the cultural touchstones of my peers (MTV and the Smurfs were anathema). But I am an engineer, a scientist, a rational-thinker (for the most part).
I started out at a "Jesus Camp"-level crazy private school. Luckily I got into the public school system before any real science "education" could take place. (There were good things about spending four years at a church school. We had a church service, complete with 15 minutes of praise and worship music every morning. By the time I was 7, I could improvise harmonies and counter-melodies.)
But that easily could have gone differently. Had I stayed in that school through to junior high or high school, there's no telling how warped I would have been. I know this is America and freedom of religion, and all that, but I don't want my tax dollars being used to brainwash innocent little kids. I did a little digging, and this school system in the story has a campus near my church. It's located inside the nut-job church one block away. How shocking to learn that my tax dollars are going to pay for this "school." The sad part is, the education facility run by my church is really struggling, precisely because they won't play these dishonest games to garner state funds. Oh the irony.
I think in this case we can use the term "literally" rather than "ironic." This is "literally like calling the FAA because you got hit by a paper airplane."
To use "literally" (which indicates a non-figurative statement) in conjunction with "like" (which indicates the figurative form called simile) defies logic. "Literally" is not a flavoring word to be bandied about for emphasis. Or perhaps you were literally being ironic.
Very true. We had to catch a red-eye out of Vegas one time on the way back from Hawaii. Man, that was rough. There was a bachelor party that boarded just before we took off. The flight attendant did the best she could, but every half hour or so, she'd have to go back there and hush them up. Here I was thinking my 2 year old was going to be the loud one on the flight, but he slept like a... well, you know.
You realize this happens on planes already, right? People are loud, rude, obnoxious, drink-spilling, stinky, barfing, etc. on airplanes all the time.
I was flying back from Canada, and the guy in the next seat was buying booze for the whole row. It was a night flight (not a red-eye), and we were a little loud. Not rowdy, mind you, just a little animated. You know what happens when somebody gets loud on a plane? The flight attendant asks you to be more quiet and respectful of the other passengers. It only takes one such warning to settle down, because there is the implied threat of getting detained at landing if you don't shut the hell up right now (especially on an international flight where your constitution rights can pretty much be disregarded).
They are using the word "rational" to describe a specific, common-sense-to-humans, transitive property of preferences. That is all. You are reading way to much into their choice of words. The whole point of evolution by natural selection is that certain traits emerge because they are adaptive. What this paper sets out to show is that the behavior we see is not "rational" in the common sense, but it is still adaptive. It did not evolve "due to an absurd amount of chaos." They're basically arguing that long-term adaptivity trumps short-term logic.
Really there's a pretty good allegory to human behavior here. People frequently prefer to do things that are not in their long-term best interest, because they only think about their short-term best interest. Eating your second-favorite chocolate first could lead to your wife only buying milk chocolate, since you obviously like it better. Shooting the guy in the row in front of you might seem like a good way to get him to stop texting, but it's a terrible way to enjoy the rest of your movie. Faking being in the CIA might sound like a great way to get a nice paid vacation, but you will eventually get busted. Groups of people (think governments) are particularly bad at this, too. If I list any examples, I'll get modded as flamebait, but I'm sure you can think of several.
Another Florida officer named Curtis Reeves shot and killed a teenager for looting. But it couldn't be the same guy because the ages don't add up. This guy was 33 in '82, making him 64 now. By 1982 he already had two dozen complaints against him, including 8 write-ups. You'd think after the first few, he would have had some sort of actual punishment. Not exactly a squeaky clean record. Who knows, maybe it is the same guy, just a wrong age in one article or the other?