so? 70% is a meaninless number.
How much antibiotic is that per pound?
"contaminated "
ohh, lets use scare words instead of science.
Or, you know, keep thing antibiotics and magically never go away, get pissed away, or are even present in the final product.
LOL! I don't think I made any qualifications about how much actually gets eaten in the final product, I was just quoting a number from Wikipedia. Maybe you should go post this there so the article is less subjective. Maybe calculate how much that is per pound and put that in there too in case anyone wants to know.
Sorry if I scared you. What would be the "scientific" term? You know, for next time.
God, you are so fucking stupid. I mean dumb as rocks. Fortunately, you're ego won';t let you realize that so you continue to spout of nonsense.
Hah! That's what I was waiting for. You are ~the tenth person that has said that, so the post is entirely redundant. I suppose your ego wouldn't let you pass up the chance to tell someone they are wrong in the rudest way you can. Not only does that sound like junior school playground name calling, but you spell at a grade 5 level. Wheee!
Yes, I was wrong, I'll get over it, but you are an idiot, and an asshole and that's not something so easily overcome.
I knew/. wouldn't let me down. Now I feel better, for a while there I thought I wasn't going to get any mileage at all out of being wrong.
Yes, you're the fourth person to say that, I get it, I fucked up.
I was prompted to go to Wikipedia and it turns out my preconceptions were in left field. The main point though is this: Livestock consume 70% of the antibiotics in the United States. (Albeit for different reasons than I stated) They are also injected with synthetic growth hormones.
I'm Canadian, and the article suggests that we haven't deregulated the cattle industry yet. i.e. it's still illegal to sell meat contaminated with antibiotics and hormones in this country. Comforting.
Looks like this particular comment and its moderation proves the point made by OP about utter ignorance of even fairly intelligent members of the public about the important details of the problem.
You are too kind. The traditional/. method of dealing with basic errors like substituting 'virus' for 'bacteria' as above would have been to label me a moron who knows nothing about anything, and then slander my mother.
Giving antibiotics to farm animals also doesn't help and genetically mutilated crops is an other example of the same problem of making bacteria drug resistant
Yes, cattle are fed corn, because it is heavily subsidized, and this makes them ill. So cattle are raised on a diet of corn and antibiotics. Then we eat the meat, laced with antibiotics, and the viruses in our bloodstream mutate to brush off this rather mild onslaught.
Not buying beef that was raised on corn is a possible solution, but that just means you won't be raising superbugs, everyone else will still be doing it.
LOL! Yeah, that was more or less the point of my terse comment. Taking code out is quite often the sane and proper thing to do. If it doesn't look good to someone who is clueless and in charge, well, that is a social bug that is more difficult to deal with.
I don't think rewriting is the same as refactoring. Sometimes you need to do a rewrite, when you get it completely wrong the first time, or wrong enough that you can't stand it. Refactoring is less severe, cleaning out dead wood, making things more efficient, removing redundancies and the like.
[sarcasm]So I take it people will be moving into Chernobyl and Fukushima today?[/sarcasm]. What part of radiation exposure and contamination is not clear?
The part where you're acting like blowing a nuclear warhead in a non-nuclear fashion wouldn't be pretty simple to clean up? Uranium and Plutonium are both pretty simple to collect and contain...
Yeah, that part, do your own research. I refuse to take up the task of debunking fear mongering just because you are gullible and believe what you see on CNN. You'll have to think for yourself, who knows, you might enjoy it!
Slashdot Mirror
That is also known as stealing.
Bullshit. The files were returned in the exact same condition as he received them.
Now copyright violations OTOH...
You actually return the files? I have no experience with DRM, other than I have to use my pc speakers when I stream content to my HDTV.
One more example of DRM being about protecting business models
I like that thought, I hadn't considered it that way.
e;e;s;s;s;s;w;stab Cry;flee
You yellow backstabbing anonymous coward.
weild thor;scan
e;hammer ac
sac corpse
f1r5t p05t
Nuke the planetary surface from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.
Which turned out not to be true.
so? 70% is a meaninless number. How much antibiotic is that per pound?
"contaminated " ohh, lets use scare words instead of science.
Or, you know, keep thing antibiotics and magically never go away, get pissed away, or are even present in the final product.
LOL! I don't think I made any qualifications about how much actually gets eaten in the final product, I was just quoting a number from Wikipedia. Maybe you should go post this there so the article is less subjective. Maybe calculate how much that is per pound and put that in there too in case anyone wants to know.
Sorry if I scared you. What would be the "scientific" term? You know, for next time.
God, you are so fucking stupid. I mean dumb as rocks. Fortunately, you're ego won';t let you realize that so you continue to spout of nonsense.
Hah! That's what I was waiting for. You are ~the tenth person that has said that, so the post is entirely redundant. I suppose your ego wouldn't let you pass up the chance to tell someone they are wrong in the rudest way you can. Not only does that sound like junior school playground name calling, but you spell at a grade 5 level. Wheee!
Yes, I was wrong, I'll get over it, but you are an idiot, and an asshole and that's not something so easily overcome.
I knew /. wouldn't let me down. Now I feel better, for a while there I thought I wasn't going to get any mileage at all out of being wrong.
Well, I certainly didn't get away with it. I said I didn't like biology. I suspect I'll get another half dozen posts telling me I was wrong.
Yes, you're the fourth person to say that, I get it, I fucked up.
I was prompted to go to Wikipedia and it turns out my preconceptions were in left field. The main point though is this: Livestock consume 70% of the antibiotics in the United States. (Albeit for different reasons than I stated) They are also injected with synthetic growth hormones.
I'm Canadian, and the article suggests that we haven't deregulated the cattle industry yet. i.e. it's still illegal to sell meat contaminated with antibiotics and hormones in this country. Comforting.
I tried to patent "The beatings will continue until morale improves." But Microsoft beat me to it.
"Viruses react to antibiotics" +4 informative.
Looks like this particular comment and its moderation proves the point made by OP about utter ignorance of even fairly intelligent members of the public about the important details of the problem.
You are too kind. The traditional /. method of dealing with basic errors like substituting 'virus' for 'bacteria' as above would have been to label me a moron who knows nothing about anything, and then slander my mother.
I never liked biology.
Giving antibiotics to farm animals also doesn't help and genetically mutilated crops is an other example of the same problem of making bacteria drug resistant
Yes, cattle are fed corn, because it is heavily subsidized, and this makes them ill. So cattle are raised on a diet of corn and antibiotics. Then we eat the meat, laced with antibiotics, and the viruses in our bloodstream mutate to brush off this rather mild onslaught.
Not buying beef that was raised on corn is a possible solution, but that just means you won't be raising superbugs, everyone else will still be doing it.
LOL! Yeah, that was more or less the point of my terse comment. Taking code out is quite often the sane and proper thing to do. If it doesn't look good to someone who is clueless and in charge, well, that is a social bug that is more difficult to deal with.
I don't think rewriting is the same as refactoring. Sometimes you need to do a rewrite, when you get it completely wrong the first time, or wrong enough that you can't stand it. Refactoring is less severe, cleaning out dead wood, making things more efficient, removing redundancies and the like.
Chernobyl was a meltdown, not a dirty bomb. A dirty bomb just spreads uranium/plutonium around, it isn't fissile.
Is it just me or does that guy have an incredibly tiny head? Seriously, look at the picture of him in the article.
I thought so too, then I decided his body was just huge.
But you might be right.
Julian Assange will. He'll get the massive publicity that he craves, plus the smug satisfaction that he was right.
Yup.
Refactor, refactor, refactor
KISS technology, nothing beats it.
The US is not encumbered by the the need to observe international treaties.
1) Yes, they most certainly are, in every practical sense.
From the first page of a Google search. You can educate yourself by reading further, or not, I don't care, but you are incorrect.
http://www.twf.org/News/Y2009/0926-IranPlant.html
http://www.twf.org/News/Y2003/0311-NPT.html
http://www.unitedstatesgovernment.net/violatinginternationaltreaties.htm
http://defense-and-freedom.blogspot.com/2009/07/nuclear-non-proliferation-treaty.html
http://rwor.org/a/110/greatest-proliferator-en.html
2) Judging from this and other posts, you're just short of being a moron.
Oh dear! You think so? I'll consider where that is coming from, sort of a catch-22.
If a moron calls you a moron, does a tree fall in the forest?
[sarcasm]So I take it people will be moving into Chernobyl and Fukushima today?[/sarcasm]. What part of radiation exposure and contamination is not clear?
The part where you're acting like blowing a nuclear warhead in a non-nuclear fashion wouldn't be pretty simple to clean up? Uranium and Plutonium are both pretty simple to collect and contain...
Yeah, that part, do your own research. I refuse to take up the task of debunking fear mongering just because you are gullible and believe what you see on CNN. You'll have to think for yourself, who knows, you might enjoy it!
it makes an area unliveable and may kill a population more slowly through exposure.
No, it doesn't.
What do you mean by panty waist? (FTFY)
Someone who isn't psychotic?
No, we'd go to war once a month and then cry about it a few days later (not actually serious, )
Ever been married?
And no one expects one.
Dirty bombs aren't actually much of a threat. Most of what you have read about them is fear mongering.
The US is not encumbered by the the need to observe international treaties.