actually, the one I read was headlined and championed as proof as as a cancer causing agent. I read the whole thing and realized '5%', completely moved on, for good.
and it doesn't break down in your small intestine, it passes right through. That's why you get diarrhea.
Aspartame does break down into poison. One of the components it breaks down into is methanol. Wood alcohol. The stuff that makes you blind. Drinking the amount of aspartame found in 14 cases of pop every day would fill your system with a large amount of methanol. No question that's going to have negative effects.
The amount of methanol actually found in *normal* consumption of diet sodas, however, is similar to the amount found in things like fruit juice. If your body can deal with fruit juice, it can deal with aspartame-sweetened drinks. As always, it's the dose that makes the poison.
Yes, there is a positive correlation between drinking diet sodas and being overweight. But that's an expected correlation, not a causation. Seriously, what sort of person who's not prone (for whatever reasons) to weight gain is suddenly going to decide, "You know, I want to switch from normal pepsi to diet."? The people who start drinking diet are the ones having trouble with weight gain already. The problem is, a can of pepsi is 150 calories. That's the amount of calories in 1/3 cup of raisins. Yeah, it helps somewhat with your calorie consumption, but it's not the big picture on its own.
it doesn't break down in your stomach, it breaks down above 112F or something.
The most recent study I read was in 2008 or so (and yes, I read the entire thing). The conclusion was the per-kilogram consumption level in mice found to increase the CHANCES (I don't recall if it was additive or multiplicative) of getting cancer by 5% was the quantity of aspartame found in 12-12oz cans of diet coke.
And you had to drink that quantity every day for... 10 years, or something. Sometime that I never, ever do or will do, and if I did, I would have teeth problems long before cancer problems
and even if you were drinking that much, the quality of life improvement because you enjoy it so is probably worth the 5% increase in risk for cancer
can anyone explain why Samsung went to the trouble of designing Exynos if they weren't going to use it everywhere?
From what I can tell they were used in their foreign mobile offerings (international Galaxy versions), possibly because of different LTE patents required for US use, and possibly due to less competition from handset manufacturers meant they didn't need to differentiate on performance. Still, I'm surprised one would go to the trouble designing their own SOC and not go to the trouble of using that R&D investment everywhere.
"entered a form of hysteresis, a condition in which the control response lags behind changes in the effect causing it." I had a girlfriend with that condition.
but what about when the continental mommy makes the continental child put its deep-sea continental toys back where they belong on the continental shelf?
Not to mention that defrauding banksters isn't the crime it is made out to be
Actually, even if you've managed to delude yourself into thinking that it's OK to steal from people you don't like, defrauding bankers hurts us all here. Here's why: 1) It costs the bank's customers through higher credit interest and lower debit interested 2) If the bank fails customers are likely to lose out (although most individual customers will have their deposits guaranteed by the state) 3) The state guarantees deposits of individual customers (up to a certain limit) so, if the state has to bail out those customers, we all pay.
banks don't fail over $1.8m if they weren't going to fail already.
The banks can't just raise rates to make up for it, either, then customers will go elsewhere. If anything this just encourages banks to operate with more efficiency.
reminds me of a guy who posted to the bitcoin section of reddit, he stumbled on some 67 bitcoins because he'd miss-typed in one one of those long passphrases with supposedly random words.
I'm more concerned about the effect this has on peoples' perception of our foreign policy. If people understood exactly how easy it is to build a Uranium atomic bomb (I understand we're talking about hydrogen here), they might feel very differently about being ok with Iran saying no to UN or IAEA regulator snooping.
Hydrogen bomb knowledge is still not exactly common (like the uranium bomb knowledge is) so I can understand and even support their interest here. This isn't even about domestic consumption, anybody here could figure it out how to find the info if they really wanted, it's about foreign power
Perhaps you've forgotten what it was like to be young. I, for one, am very glad for my childhood for the protective measures that were placed around sexuality. The overwhelming support for them speaks volumes to the reality. You're an outlier. Your experience may be different, but it's still an outlier.
who watches the watchmen? who repairs the watches? who watches the watch-repair-men repairing the watches? who repairs the repairmen? who mans the men? who mens the man? who is the man anyhow?
it's time we start asking the questions that matter
I strongly recommend watching "This Film is Not Yet Rated"... it applies just as well to the ESRB as it does to the MPAA.
yeah, maybe not. that move is a complete waste of time.
from a non-pessimistic viewpoint, it actually makes a sort of sense that the head of the publisher of the most controversial, well selling rating-pushing game would be the head of the rating agency. He has more experience with parents fussing than anyone
Near as I can tell, every official "ratings" operation I've ever encountered has been, to paraphrase OWK, a hive of scum and villainy. Almost never do the ratings make sense, they pay absolutely no mind to the actual state of knowledge / interest / sophistication of young people, they routinely ok violence and they pull their virtual lace panties up over their own heads if sex rears its terrifying, world-destroying head... seriously, on the list of people I'd like to bitch slap until my hand hurts, ratings boards are right near the top.
Seriously. Ratings boards. Ugh.
you still have a fairly low user ID so I wouldn't expect you to be at a point where you've seen the full impact of your decisions. It's natural that you would still consider the establishment's judgements with such disdain
Good parenting is about knowing the tradeoffs and finding a solution that doesn't require you into compromising "compensating advantages" and getting "Upset" daughters (have them). TV was and is Optional. I chose to give up some conveniences for the sake of raising my kids better than the marketers wanted me to raise them.
At age two - three, there is NOTHING on TV worth getting a brat at the store. Read them a book. Play with them in the sandbox. Teach them YOUR values, one of mine was, "you're more important to me than plopping you in front of a TV for the next three hours".
when I was a kid I watched Mr. Rogers' Neighborhood and Reading Rainbow and Winnie the Pooh.
trade offs is compromise which is how we got stuck with voting for only 1 of 2 people-- because we believed the lie that "voting for someone besides those two is throwing your vote away" instead of correctly being told "the only way to throw your vote away is by voting for someone you don't agree with"
This is marked funny, but think about it for a minute. Our computers, phones, tablets -- even watches -- are collecting way more information than this Barbie is and yet how many people think these ubiquitous machines are creepy? Not many. The lesson here might be this: the shape of the surveillance device doesn't make it creepy -- what it collects is what makes it creepy. Oddly though, very few people are creeped out by their own phone.
Two conclusions based on "shape irrelevant":
1) Barbie, phones, computers etc. etc. have become extremely creepy surveillance devices (this is where I am, which is depressing, because I've loved technology for so long).
2) Barbie, phones, computers etc. etc. are surveillance devices and surveillance is totally not creepy -- just don't care.
To mix and match 1 & 2 though, making barbie creepy and siri not, is inconsistent and illogical.
a good childhood is about innocence, fun, and the world being in general a good place.
Slashdot Mirror
actually, the one I read was headlined and championed as proof as as a cancer causing agent. I read the whole thing and realized '5%', completely moved on, for good.
and it doesn't break down in your small intestine, it passes right through. That's why you get diarrhea.
Aspartame does break down into poison. One of the components it breaks down into is methanol. Wood alcohol. The stuff that makes you blind. Drinking the amount of aspartame found in 14 cases of pop every day would fill your system with a large amount of methanol. No question that's going to have negative effects.
The amount of methanol actually found in *normal* consumption of diet sodas, however, is similar to the amount found in things like fruit juice. If your body can deal with fruit juice, it can deal with aspartame-sweetened drinks. As always, it's the dose that makes the poison.
Yes, there is a positive correlation between drinking diet sodas and being overweight. But that's an expected correlation, not a causation. Seriously, what sort of person who's not prone (for whatever reasons) to weight gain is suddenly going to decide, "You know, I want to switch from normal pepsi to diet."? The people who start drinking diet are the ones having trouble with weight gain already. The problem is, a can of pepsi is 150 calories. That's the amount of calories in 1/3 cup of raisins. Yeah, it helps somewhat with your calorie consumption, but it's not the big picture on its own.
it doesn't break down in your stomach, it breaks down above 112F or something.
The most recent study I read was in 2008 or so (and yes, I read the entire thing). The conclusion was the per-kilogram consumption level in mice found to increase the CHANCES (I don't recall if it was additive or multiplicative) of getting cancer by 5% was the quantity of aspartame found in 12-12oz cans of diet coke.
And you had to drink that quantity every day for ... 10 years, or something.
Sometime that I never, ever do or will do, and if I did, I would have teeth problems long before cancer problems
and even if you were drinking that much, the quality of life improvement because you enjoy it so is probably worth the 5% increase in risk for cancer
can anyone explain why Samsung went to the trouble of designing Exynos if they weren't going to use it everywhere?
From what I can tell they were used in their foreign mobile offerings (international Galaxy versions), possibly because of different LTE patents required for US use, and possibly due to less competition from handset manufacturers meant they didn't need to differentiate on performance. Still, I'm surprised one would go to the trouble designing their own SOC and not go to the trouble of using that R&D investment everywhere.
wow. that's a cool way to get around the 'can't open source because media content licenses' issue
"entered a form of hysteresis, a condition in which the control response lags behind changes in the effect causing it."
I had a girlfriend with that condition.
haha
Oh, you can find someone with a "thing" for anyone.
Just Google chubby chaser sometime.
I know better than to do that these days :)
>> For the dude doing it...what's the penalty again for punching out a TSA idiot?
Gitmo?
Seriously folks - you may have a lovely country, but this sh!t keeps my tourist dollar in my bank and unspent.
coward.
declare him an enemy combatant
but what about when the continental mommy makes the continental child put its deep-sea continental toys back where they belong on the continental shelf?
Not to mention that defrauding banksters isn't the crime it is made out to be
Actually, even if you've managed to delude yourself into thinking that it's OK to steal from people you don't like, defrauding bankers hurts us all here. Here's why: 1) It costs the bank's customers through higher credit interest and lower debit interested 2) If the bank fails customers are likely to lose out (although most individual customers will have their deposits guaranteed by the state) 3) The state guarantees deposits of individual customers (up to a certain limit) so, if the state has to bail out those customers, we all pay.
banks don't fail over $1.8m if they weren't going to fail already.
The banks can't just raise rates to make up for it, either, then customers will go elsewhere. If anything this just encourages banks to operate with more efficiency.
reminds me of a guy who posted to the bitcoin section of reddit, he stumbled on some 67 bitcoins because he'd miss-typed in one one of those long passphrases with supposedly random words.
I'm more concerned about the effect this has on peoples' perception of our foreign policy. If people understood exactly how easy it is to build a Uranium atomic bomb (I understand we're talking about hydrogen here), they might feel very differently about being ok with Iran saying no to UN or IAEA regulator snooping.
Hydrogen bomb knowledge is still not exactly common (like the uranium bomb knowledge is) so I can understand and even support their interest here. This isn't even about domestic consumption, anybody here could figure it out how to find the info if they really wanted, it's about foreign power
who is the man anyhow?
it's time we start asking the questions that matter
Why does the ESRB matter so much to you? I haven't looked at ESRB ratings since, well, since my parents stopped caring in the 90s...
OK, but you still do need to move out
ok.
Perhaps you've forgotten what it was like to be young. I, for one, am very glad for my childhood for the protective measures that were placed around sexuality. The overwhelming support for them speaks volumes to the reality. You're an outlier. Your experience may be different, but it's still an outlier.
Who controls the movie ratings?
who watches the watchmen?
who repairs the watches?
who watches the watch-repair-men repairing the watches?
who repairs the repairmen?
who mans the men?
who mens the man?
who is the man anyhow?
it's time we start asking the questions that matter
I strongly recommend watching "This Film is Not Yet Rated"... it applies just as well to the ESRB as it does to the MPAA.
yeah, maybe not. that move is a complete waste of time.
from a non-pessimistic viewpoint, it actually makes a sort of sense that the head of the publisher of the most controversial, well selling rating-pushing game would be the head of the rating agency. He has more experience with parents fussing than anyone
Near as I can tell, every official "ratings" operation I've ever encountered has been, to paraphrase OWK, a hive of scum and villainy. Almost never do the ratings make sense, they pay absolutely no mind to the actual state of knowledge / interest / sophistication of young people, they routinely ok violence and they pull their virtual lace panties up over their own heads if sex rears its terrifying, world-destroying head... seriously, on the list of people I'd like to bitch slap until my hand hurts, ratings boards are right near the top.
Seriously. Ratings boards. Ugh.
you still have a fairly low user ID so I wouldn't expect you to be at a point where you've seen the full impact of your decisions. It's natural that you would still consider the establishment's judgements with such disdain
Life is about grey and tradeoffs.
Good parenting is about knowing the tradeoffs and finding a solution that doesn't require you into compromising "compensating advantages" and getting "Upset" daughters (have them). TV was and is Optional. I chose to give up some conveniences for the sake of raising my kids better than the marketers wanted me to raise them.
At age two - three, there is NOTHING on TV worth getting a brat at the store. Read them a book. Play with them in the sandbox. Teach them YOUR values, one of mine was, "you're more important to me than plopping you in front of a TV for the next three hours".
when I was a kid I watched Mr. Rogers' Neighborhood and Reading Rainbow and Winnie the Pooh.
trade offs is compromise which is how we got stuck with voting for only 1 of 2 people-- because we believed the lie that "voting for someone besides those two is throwing your vote away" instead of correctly being told "the only way to throw your vote away is by voting for someone you don't agree with"
This is marked funny, but think about it for a minute. Our computers, phones, tablets -- even watches -- are collecting way more information than this Barbie is and yet how many people think these ubiquitous machines are creepy? Not many. The lesson here might be this: the shape of the surveillance device doesn't make it creepy -- what it collects is what makes it creepy. Oddly though, very few people are creeped out by their own phone.
Two conclusions based on "shape irrelevant":
1) Barbie, phones, computers etc. etc. have become extremely creepy surveillance devices (this is where I am, which is depressing, because I've loved technology for so long).
2) Barbie, phones, computers etc. etc. are surveillance devices and surveillance is totally not creepy -- just don't care.
To mix and match 1 & 2 though, making barbie creepy and siri not, is inconsistent and illogical.
a good childhood is about innocence, fun, and the world being in general a good place.
Big Brother is there to help with that.
...be a book or a doll? In an age where Internet is thick on the ground, no contest.
So, will a weak-AI owned by a for-profit company inspire little girls to have this conversation:
"Mom! The Raspberry Pi 2 is out! It's got four ARM7 cores! My 3D printer would print a pair of ruby slippers in under an HOUR! Please!"
or this one?
"Mom! If I want to be a size zero, I need Kellog's Brand Nutrigrain Bars!"
wait a minute, are those the only two options?
neither seems quite right to me
but beowolf would approve!!!
has he considered upgrading fine-motor to a very-fine-motor?
You REALLY want to just piss off martians, don't you?
but it would appear the martians have plenty of frosty piss for us to use for fuel???
we need from 10 to 13 servers, each with at least 8 cores, 512GB RAM, and ample disk space (10-15TB), running for about 5-9 months
sounds pretty slow to me
I can't be bothered to read into the details of a situation when it makes my profession look bad