"There is no such thing as empty calories" pure sugar contains calories, but has little nutritional value. Just so you know, calories are one component of nutrition - have you heard of scurvy?
"short of incinerating that meat to a fine ash" while I wouldn't argue that cooking destroys meat's food value, it certainly changes it.
"contain the same aminoacids... as your body is made of" and..? People need more than calories and amino acids. Have you not heard of vitamins?
"E.g., sugars get turned into fats and viceversa. (Which is why Atkins works or why drinking will give you a fat liver.) " and "[fat will] get converted into glucose..." these two demonstrate that you don't know what you are talking about. Firstly, people _cannot_ convert fat into glucose: we lack that ability. Secondly, Atkins diet is controversial - blithely saying it "works" is stupid.
"There is no such thing as storing, say, vitamins or proteins as fat for later." This is pretty much the only correct thing in your post (as far as I know).
"So do yourself a favour. If you want to talk about nutrition, read about nutrition" I think you should take your own advice. The person you are criticising is actually correct, it is YOU who are wrong.
(I have already moderated in this discussion, but parent is so wrong AND aggressive I had to reply. Can people please refrain from speaking so strongly about that which they know so little?!?)
"If the OP hasn't even started getting sales, now might be an excellent time to accept the offer."
Interestingly, I've heard the exact opposite. Once you start generating sales, then your company becomes self-propelling, and its perceived value is much higher. Sales also put pressure on a potential buyer, because they know that the value of your company is increasing day-by-day. Therefore, you should also try to demonstrate that (even if you're not selling now), you will be selling soon. That will make you more valuable. Having said this, it of course all depends on specifics;-)
I don't have a deep understanding of what ICANN does, but it seems to me that the ideal would be that it is controlled by _nobody_. I had a quick glance at the wikipedia article ICANN, which proposes that ICANN would be replaced with (among other options) a free-for-all. Can someone with more technical knowledge explain what this would entail?
"Evolution also didn't have any use for post-reproductive individuals"
That is incorrect. Older individuals generally assist younger individuals, giving them the benefit of wisdom and experience, which helps the younger individuals to reproduce. Generally people help people who are close to them (family, relations, tribe). Hence, older people can still assist the propagation of their genes.
You make a good point, but it's hardly the whole picture.
How many people have been killed as a result of military action abroad -- a debatable figure I'm sure, because armies don't generally count foreign military, let alone civilian casualties. Secondly, military superiority has not always been used prudently, and has been used to shore up dictators and opress people. If you include in your tally some of this number of people, you would have a very large number indeed.
By the way, this is in no way specific to the US military, it is just that the US currently has by far the largest military. Similar things could be said about the British Empire, European 'colonialism', or China in Tibet.
Back to the subject of this article, the thing that really concerns me about robotic drones is that it puts even more power in whatever centralised control authority is running them. Given the number of power abuses by government and military officials, is this really something we want? Having a robotic army would be every dictator's wet dream.
Having said that, there are actions that the US took in the 20th century that ought to be condemned. Could you call it "imperialism"? That might be a bit of a stretch, but I think one could certainly argue that the US used military means to interfere with the politics of other countries to the benefit of the US and without concern for the other country's citizens.
Sure, plenty of countries do plenty of terrible things and I think they should be criticised too -- but be careful if you are defending the US just because it is _your_ country.
I guess it's that old anthropic principle at work again - our society has survived, and we're still around to talk about it, hence we solved the problem. That doesn't mean we'll necessarily solve all problems that might be thrown our way, and it's no guarantee that our society will survive current challenges. But hey, if it doesn't, there'll be no one around to say "I told you so".
A lot of people think "oh man, Y2K - what a hullabaloo over nothing" not realising that massive effort went into making it a non-issue. Do you really subscribe to the theory that we should just kick back and relax, and that everything will work itself out? That sort of thinking seems incredibly insular to me.
I think this sort of thing prevents the uptake of Free Software in general. People want to be part of an "in crowd", and seek ways to believe it's true (eg. Da Vinci code, fashion, nerd snobbishness, etc). People will pay for this feeling, and I reckon it was used to help prop up the monarchies (and now demonarchies*).
I mean, how "exclusive" is a live set on iTMS? Anyone can buy it, right? This is where marketing comes in. Grass-roots arts and software producers don't want to come across as "here's some scones that my mad-great-aunt made (they make great hearth-stones), all proceeds to the parish..."
"is really wealth redistribution from the working middle class to the lazy bums"
so how can you vote republican, when what they do is wealth redistribution from everybody else to the richest 1%? Thankfully for you, you have other choices!
Slashdot Mirror
You are wrong and the GPP is correct.
"There is no such thing as empty calories"
pure sugar contains calories, but has little nutritional value. Just so you know, calories are one component of nutrition - have you heard of scurvy?
"short of incinerating that meat to a fine ash"
while I wouldn't argue that cooking destroys meat's food value, it certainly changes it.
"contain the same aminoacids ... as your body is made of"
and..? People need more than calories and amino acids. Have you not heard of vitamins?
"E.g., sugars get turned into fats and viceversa. (Which is why Atkins works or why drinking will give you a fat liver.) " and ..."
"[fat will] get converted into glucose
these two demonstrate that you don't know what you are talking about. Firstly, people _cannot_ convert fat into glucose: we lack that ability.
Secondly, Atkins diet is controversial - blithely saying it "works" is stupid.
"There is no such thing as storing, say, vitamins or proteins as fat for later."
This is pretty much the only correct thing in your post (as far as I know).
"So do yourself a favour. If you want to talk about nutrition, read about nutrition"
I think you should take your own advice. The person you are criticising is actually correct, it is YOU who are wrong.
(I have already moderated in this discussion, but parent is so wrong AND aggressive I had to reply. Can people please refrain from speaking so strongly about that which they know so little?!?)
"If the OP hasn't even started getting sales, now might be an excellent time to accept the offer."
Interestingly, I've heard the exact opposite. Once you start generating sales, then your company becomes self-propelling, and its perceived value is much higher. Sales also put pressure on a potential buyer, because they know that the value of your company is increasing day-by-day. Therefore, you should also try to demonstrate that (even if you're not selling now), you will be selling soon. That will make you more valuable. Having said this, it of course all depends on specifics ;-)
Yeah - Vorbis should've hired the same marketing dept that came up with 'h264'! (snort) Open-source idiots...
"Journalism is entertainment"
Ahh... the sweet sound of democracy dying...
I don't have a deep understanding of what ICANN does, but it seems to me that the ideal would be that it is controlled by _nobody_. I had a quick glance at the wikipedia article ICANN, which proposes that ICANN would be replaced with (among other options) a free-for-all. Can someone with more technical knowledge explain what this would entail?
If it's Free, then how can it expire?
"Evolution also didn't have any use for post-reproductive individuals"
That is incorrect. Older individuals generally assist younger individuals, giving them the benefit of wisdom and experience, which helps the younger individuals to reproduce. Generally people help people who are close to them (family, relations, tribe). Hence, older people can still assist the propagation of their genes.
You make a good point, but it's hardly the whole picture.
How many people have been killed as a result of military action abroad -- a debatable figure I'm sure, because armies don't generally count foreign military, let alone civilian casualties.
Secondly, military superiority has not always been used prudently, and has been used to shore up dictators and opress people. If you include in your tally some of this number of people, you would have a very large number indeed.
By the way, this is in no way specific to the US military, it is just that the US currently has by far the largest military. Similar things could be said about the British Empire, European 'colonialism', or China in Tibet.
Back to the subject of this article, the thing that really concerns me about robotic drones is that it puts even more power in whatever centralised control authority is running them. Given the number of power abuses by government and military officials, is this really something we want? Having a robotic army would be every dictator's wet dream.
Yeah... forget microwaves: just drop a cable down. oh... wait...
"the ideals behind the death penalty."
That is a scary combination of words...
GP is correct - "clean" coal is no more real than fusion power (as mentioned in another post)
Hmm.. it would have been truely poetic if the song they'd chosen to highlight this was "I, me, mine":
All I can hear: 'I, me, mine. I, me, mine. I, me, mine.'
What a brilliant song... I am so sick of bastards in suits screwing with our world...
Don't worry - I hear that the stable release of Vista is coming Real Soon Now ;-)
I am not writing this post to bash the US.
Having said that, there are actions that the US took in the 20th century that ought to be condemned. Could you call it "imperialism"? That might be a bit of a stretch, but I think one could certainly argue that the US used military means to interfere with the politics of other countries to the benefit of the US and without concern for the other country's citizens.
Sure, plenty of countries do plenty of terrible things and I think they should be criticised too -- but be careful if you are defending the US just because it is _your_ country.
I guess it's that old anthropic principle at work again - our society has survived, and we're still around to talk about it, hence we solved the problem. That doesn't mean we'll necessarily solve all problems that might be thrown our way, and it's no guarantee that our society will survive current challenges. But hey, if it doesn't, there'll be no one around to say "I told you so".
A lot of people think "oh man, Y2K - what a hullabaloo over nothing" not realising that massive effort went into making it a non-issue. Do you really subscribe to the theory that we should just kick back and relax, and that everything will work itself out? That sort of thinking seems incredibly insular to me.
heard of gambler's ruin? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler%27s_ruin)
Don't worry - if you start saving your pennies now, you should be able to afford it ;-)
The summary is inaccurate, he is actually minister of
"Censorship", "Civilian Pacification" and "Eugenics for a better Australia".
"Apple regularly features exclusive live sets"
I think this sort of thing prevents the uptake of Free Software in general. People want to be part of an "in crowd", and seek ways to believe it's true (eg. Da Vinci code, fashion, nerd snobbishness, etc). People will pay for this feeling, and I reckon it was used to help prop up the monarchies (and now demonarchies*).
I mean, how "exclusive" is a live set on iTMS? Anyone can buy it, right? This is where marketing comes in. Grass-roots arts and software producers don't want to come across as "here's some scones that my mad-great-aunt made (they make great hearth-stones), all proceeds to the parish..."
*typo intended, exscuse the piss-take ;-)
Just to be a devil's advocate - if they're not generating profit, then people aren't running those lights, and the cameras aren't necessary...
So, are you saying that your reason for liking the Mac is knowing that if you can't do something, at least no one else can either?
>> I'm sure God would be cool with it.
I'm not a believer, but I always get a laugh when people say stuff like this - as if they could put themselves in the shoes of an omnipotent deity...
...and while we're at it, we should sterilize all those who advocate sterilization.
Oh, damn...
"is really wealth redistribution from the working middle class to the lazy bums"
so how can you vote republican, when what they do is wealth redistribution from everybody else to the richest 1%? Thankfully for you, you have other choices!
"you wouldn't put up with this kind of scumbag business move with ... MP3 players"
you mean like the ipod?
(I say this as the owner of an ipod nano)