If I'm going to pay $1000 for stickers, they better get me a blow job every time I'm driving. Only, these stickers will probably have the opposite effect.
On the flip side, it's probably better than having the RIAA walking up to you and saying, "Hey man, nice pants. Would be a shame if something happened to it."
The return of music to being a service would mean the death of the "recording industry."
Record companies are not going to reinvent themselves; they're too set in their ways. They're going to fight, tooth and nail, to continue to do what they've been doing all along. Most dying industries eventually die (buggy whip industry), but some are big enough to legislate their way to survival (tobacco industry). The RIAA is trying to do the latter, and probably a lot more successfully than we'd like to admit.
Of course, I like to think their success is temporary, but with Biden as VP, I'm not so sure anymore.
The only couple of times I have lost weight in my life I lived on salad and lean meat/chicken in tiny portions and did AT LEAST 2 hours of heavy excercise a day. Anything short of that doesn't cut it.
There are other factors that you might not be considering. If you want to lose weight that badly, as somebody else said, you should consult a nutritionist. A nutritionist will take your entire daily routine into account and give you advice specifically targetted to you and your body. They'll catch even the most mundane things, like the condiments you use. Anywhere else, you'll just hear a lot of generalizations, which may or may not work for your specific body type.
But as everybody's offering advice, here's a few simple things that will help you lose weight, though it may or may not result directly in weight loss:
1) Stop consuming sweets. Soda, candy, etc. Completely eliminate sweets from your morning dosage of caffine. Don't even add the aritificial stuff. Use soy, low-fat, or skim milk as creme, nothing else. Drink water, bottled or tap, in place of soda. Cut snacks, period. Freshly squeezed, unsweetened juice is OK in place of water, but you should really eat fresh fruit.
2) I assume you drive everywhere. Don't use drive-throughs, and park as far away as possible while still in the same lot. Yes, you have a bad ankle, but that's not an acceptable excuse. Just pace yourself, resting your ankle as you deem necessary. Use braces for support if you need to.
3) Cut your proportions. If you're eating the same stuff every day, from the same place, try to leave a small amount of food uneaten each time. Slowly increase the amount of food you leave on your plate (this should be done over weeks or months, not in a day). It's wasteful, but necessary. Maybe you can give it away. Don't take it home, unless you've left enough for a second meal, in which case, the next meal should be purely those leftovers.
4) Try to get up every hour or two at work and walk around. You don't have to have a purpose to walking around. Say hi to your coworkers. Don't go to the snack machine, the coffee machine, or whatnot during these walks. You can get some water though if you're thirsty. In fact, if you're one of those people who have water bottles that you fill up once and then sip for the rest of the day, replace it with a smaller mug.
And then try to fit in an exercise routine and look for a specific diet plan as time and opportunity permits. But there's no reason you can't do at least the first three of the above. All four have minimal impact to your health, financial, and time situation, so if you're serious about losing weight, there's really no excuse to not doing these. As I said, you might or might just lose weight as a result of doing these things, but they will help a huge amount if you decide to go on a certain diet or start a routine workout.
Well, it's simple mathematics that if somebody consumes less calories, there would be less calories to burn. The complication usually occurs when people go back to their original diets, when they want to stop "suffering" after a week or two of a low-calorie diet. In which case, they will balloon back up.
The other way isn't so simple. Calorie burn rate isn't constant. Just because people eat more doesn't mean they'll store the extra. For a lot of people with so-called high metabolism, the more they eat, the more they burn. This happens automatically, and can't really be controlled. In fact, if they just sit around and don't move after a big meal, they'll end up burning the extra calories with their brains, whether they know it or not.
Except most soft drinks don't use sugar in the US, they use high-fructose corn syrup, which has the same effects as artificial sweeteners.
People who are looking to lose weight just shouldn't drink soda, period. Stick with water and occasional juice. Better yet, brew and drink tea, no sugar or milk added, but that might be too much to ask for. If they can't follow something so simple as laying off the soda, then they're not really serious about losing weight.
You need to take a test to get a license to operate a vehicle. The purpose of the test is to ensure that anyone driving actually knows how to drive.
I'd like to see something similar for the networked computer. Not necessarily a use license, but tests that at least ensure minimal security competency before allowing users access to the outside. These "tests" don't have to be the question-answer sort, but something along the lines of putting the round peg in the round hole and the square peg in the square hole. I'll bet just making it illegal for OEM's to pre-install the OS would do wonders for security, as well as wreck havoc on the Microsoft OS monopoly.
Vehicles can kill if operated improperly (or properly, for that matter). So perhaps there should be a kill switch for the computers of people who either try to fake the test or still do stupid stuff after passing it. A virus that wipes a computer's hard drive a month after infection, or even a virus that disables the network device should be enough to discourage people from continuously doing dumb things.
Adding a period is being lazy? I think rather that lazy people would seek to reduce the number of markings needed on a page to convey the same idea (note "ur" versus "you are" or "your" or "you're"). The reasoning would be more like:
We got stupid and forgot which abbreviations need a period and which ones don't. We got stupid and couldn't tell abbreviations apart from full. We simplified the abbreviation rules to have a period at the end of all abbreviations.
Hear hear! Apple has an existing track record of building machines that overheat. That anybody is surprised only serves to indicate how short our memories are.
In fact, the first thing I thought of when reading the headine was the Apple III.
Everybody, governments, companies, content creators, privacy advocates, have the same problem: digital information is cheap to disseminate.
If somebody breaks into a library of secret documents, there's a limit to how many copies they can make and take out. Even if they were to scan and store every page in every folder in every cabinet, it's still extremely time-consuming.
If somebody breaks into a computer full of secret documents, it takes seconds, maybe minutes, to copy the whole thing. And, the person doesn't have to be physically located by the computer. The person could be halfway around the world, or just right next door but seem halfway around the world.
What it amounts to is that secret-keeping is becoming more and more difficult. Actually, this isn't true. The difficulty of secret-keeping hasn't changed. But society desires convenience. And little do people know, these two concepts are mutually exclusive.
Furthermore, while convenience is individual, keeping secrets is communal. "Secret" is a term that only has meaning within the context of systems, i.e. only people inside the system know the secret, while people outside the system do not know. The problem is when one individual wants convenience and compromises secrecy for it, then the secret is effectively compromised.
Everybody just wants to have their cake and eat it too. That kind of logical impossibility will not happen, no matter how much we might desire it.
Anyhow, it seems we are going to mimic Star Trek and just not bother to have backups for computer systems...
Or just put it up online and somebody somewhere will have a cached version of it within a few days. All you need to do is link to your webserver from your blog.
The computer knows nothing about Michael Jackson, dying, or the influence of pop culture, so it doesn't take these variables into account when considering whether a behavioral pattern is benign or malicious. It also is unable to temporarily use an unknown variable as a substitute to explain away this deviation for the duration of the lifetime of the variable, which is to say, humans make judgments based on feedback but computers only do as they're told.
IANAL as well, but I think you're misinterpreting copyright law. Copyright law these days deals with distribution. Ever since the establishment of fair use, the mere act of copying is no longer considered infringement.
I can download an album, but if I already have the existing album in another form (CD, maybe even iTunes AAC), I'm covered by fair use. The poor sap who's uploading it to me though, is not authorized to distribute, and hence is still liable for infringement.
Even if I didn't have said album, I may be able to argue that because I can't tell who has distribution rights or not, that I make the assumption that anyone who is distributing is legally doing so, and so my act of infringement is not willful. Though, I think this argument doesn't always hold water. For example, it's not hard to argue that I'm willfully infringing if I'm downloading off a P2P application. However, if I grab a torrent or follow instructions or link off of an official-looking site, who's to say that the artist isn't offering the album to me for free?
Hence the focus of the RIAA on uploaders; they're the low hanging fruit whom is all infringing. Downloaders may or may not depending on the situation.
Slashdot Mirror
If I'm going to pay $1000 for stickers, they better get me a blow job every time I'm driving. Only, these stickers will probably have the opposite effect.
On the flip side, it's probably better than having the RIAA walking up to you and saying, "Hey man, nice pants. Would be a shame if something happened to it."
And not for the lack of trying either.
Neither. I'd rather a doctor determine my treatment. But you can't always trust doctors either, which is why I often get second and third opinions.
The return of music to being a service would mean the death of the "recording industry."
Record companies are not going to reinvent themselves; they're too set in their ways. They're going to fight, tooth and nail, to continue to do what they've been doing all along. Most dying industries eventually die (buggy whip industry), but some are big enough to legislate their way to survival (tobacco industry). The RIAA is trying to do the latter, and probably a lot more successfully than we'd like to admit.
Of course, I like to think their success is temporary, but with Biden as VP, I'm not so sure anymore.
during destructive interference of collinear laser pulses
So having known for many years that we're not supposed to cross the beams, I guess now we know why.
Tell that to the 500,000 Jedi currently living in the former British colonies.
The only couple of times I have lost weight in my life I lived on salad and lean meat/chicken in tiny portions and did AT LEAST 2 hours of heavy excercise a day. Anything short of that doesn't cut it.
There are other factors that you might not be considering. If you want to lose weight that badly, as somebody else said, you should consult a nutritionist. A nutritionist will take your entire daily routine into account and give you advice specifically targetted to you and your body. They'll catch even the most mundane things, like the condiments you use. Anywhere else, you'll just hear a lot of generalizations, which may or may not work for your specific body type.
But as everybody's offering advice, here's a few simple things that will help you lose weight, though it may or may not result directly in weight loss:
1) Stop consuming sweets. Soda, candy, etc. Completely eliminate sweets from your morning dosage of caffine. Don't even add the aritificial stuff. Use soy, low-fat, or skim milk as creme, nothing else. Drink water, bottled or tap, in place of soda. Cut snacks, period. Freshly squeezed, unsweetened juice is OK in place of water, but you should really eat fresh fruit.
2) I assume you drive everywhere. Don't use drive-throughs, and park as far away as possible while still in the same lot. Yes, you have a bad ankle, but that's not an acceptable excuse. Just pace yourself, resting your ankle as you deem necessary. Use braces for support if you need to.
3) Cut your proportions. If you're eating the same stuff every day, from the same place, try to leave a small amount of food uneaten each time. Slowly increase the amount of food you leave on your plate (this should be done over weeks or months, not in a day). It's wasteful, but necessary. Maybe you can give it away. Don't take it home, unless you've left enough for a second meal, in which case, the next meal should be purely those leftovers.
4) Try to get up every hour or two at work and walk around. You don't have to have a purpose to walking around. Say hi to your coworkers. Don't go to the snack machine, the coffee machine, or whatnot during these walks. You can get some water though if you're thirsty. In fact, if you're one of those people who have water bottles that you fill up once and then sip for the rest of the day, replace it with a smaller mug.
And then try to fit in an exercise routine and look for a specific diet plan as time and opportunity permits. But there's no reason you can't do at least the first three of the above. All four have minimal impact to your health, financial, and time situation, so if you're serious about losing weight, there's really no excuse to not doing these. As I said, you might or might just lose weight as a result of doing these things, but they will help a huge amount if you decide to go on a certain diet or start a routine workout.
Well, it's simple mathematics that if somebody consumes less calories, there would be less calories to burn. The complication usually occurs when people go back to their original diets, when they want to stop "suffering" after a week or two of a low-calorie diet. In which case, they will balloon back up.
The other way isn't so simple. Calorie burn rate isn't constant. Just because people eat more doesn't mean they'll store the extra. For a lot of people with so-called high metabolism, the more they eat, the more they burn. This happens automatically, and can't really be controlled. In fact, if they just sit around and don't move after a big meal, they'll end up burning the extra calories with their brains, whether they know it or not.
Except most soft drinks don't use sugar in the US, they use high-fructose corn syrup, which has the same effects as artificial sweeteners.
People who are looking to lose weight just shouldn't drink soda, period. Stick with water and occasional juice. Better yet, brew and drink tea, no sugar or milk added, but that might be too much to ask for. If they can't follow something so simple as laying off the soda, then they're not really serious about losing weight.
And lay off the beer too.
Yes, I have experienced this numerous times in the past, so it certainly is not news.
You need to take a test to get a license to operate a vehicle. The purpose of the test is to ensure that anyone driving actually knows how to drive.
I'd like to see something similar for the networked computer. Not necessarily a use license, but tests that at least ensure minimal security competency before allowing users access to the outside. These "tests" don't have to be the question-answer sort, but something along the lines of putting the round peg in the round hole and the square peg in the square hole. I'll bet just making it illegal for OEM's to pre-install the OS would do wonders for security, as well as wreck havoc on the Microsoft OS monopoly.
Vehicles can kill if operated improperly (or properly, for that matter). So perhaps there should be a kill switch for the computers of people who either try to fake the test or still do stupid stuff after passing it. A virus that wipes a computer's hard drive a month after infection, or even a virus that disables the network device should be enough to discourage people from continuously doing dumb things.
Adding a period is being lazy? I think rather that lazy people would seek to reduce the number of markings needed on a page to convey the same idea (note "ur" versus "you are" or "your" or "you're"). The reasoning would be more like:
We got stupid and forgot which abbreviations need a period and which ones don't.
We got stupid and couldn't tell abbreviations apart from full.
We simplified the abbreviation rules to have a period at the end of all abbreviations.
We're all going to have to wait for Total Annihilation 3?
Considering TA2 never came out, TA3 would probably be announced the day after DNF was released.
Hear hear! Apple has an existing track record of building machines that overheat. That anybody is surprised only serves to indicate how short our memories are.
In fact, the first thing I thought of when reading the headine was the Apple III.
It's a new feature meant to showcase its intense coolness factor for the unbeliever, don't you know?
The iPhone 3GS is the hottest phone ever!
Everybody, governments, companies, content creators, privacy advocates, have the same problem: digital information is cheap to disseminate.
If somebody breaks into a library of secret documents, there's a limit to how many copies they can make and take out. Even if they were to scan and store every page in every folder in every cabinet, it's still extremely time-consuming.
If somebody breaks into a computer full of secret documents, it takes seconds, maybe minutes, to copy the whole thing. And, the person doesn't have to be physically located by the computer. The person could be halfway around the world, or just right next door but seem halfway around the world.
What it amounts to is that secret-keeping is becoming more and more difficult. Actually, this isn't true. The difficulty of secret-keeping hasn't changed. But society desires convenience. And little do people know, these two concepts are mutually exclusive.
Furthermore, while convenience is individual, keeping secrets is communal. "Secret" is a term that only has meaning within the context of systems, i.e. only people inside the system know the secret, while people outside the system do not know. The problem is when one individual wants convenience and compromises secrecy for it, then the secret is effectively compromised.
Everybody just wants to have their cake and eat it too. That kind of logical impossibility will not happen, no matter how much we might desire it.
Anyhow, it seems we are going to mimic Star Trek and just not bother to have backups for computer systems...
Or just put it up online and somebody somewhere will have a cached version of it within a few days. All you need to do is link to your webserver from your blog.
Only we won't reap those benefits for another 70 years, forever if the entertainment industry has their say.
The computer knows nothing about Michael Jackson, dying, or the influence of pop culture, so it doesn't take these variables into account when considering whether a behavioral pattern is benign or malicious. It also is unable to temporarily use an unknown variable as a substitute to explain away this deviation for the duration of the lifetime of the variable, which is to say, humans make judgments based on feedback but computers only do as they're told.
IANAL as well, but I think you're misinterpreting copyright law. Copyright law these days deals with distribution. Ever since the establishment of fair use, the mere act of copying is no longer considered infringement.
I can download an album, but if I already have the existing album in another form (CD, maybe even iTunes AAC), I'm covered by fair use. The poor sap who's uploading it to me though, is not authorized to distribute, and hence is still liable for infringement.
Even if I didn't have said album, I may be able to argue that because I can't tell who has distribution rights or not, that I make the assumption that anyone who is distributing is legally doing so, and so my act of infringement is not willful. Though, I think this argument doesn't always hold water. For example, it's not hard to argue that I'm willfully infringing if I'm downloading off a P2P application. However, if I grab a torrent or follow instructions or link off of an official-looking site, who's to say that the artist isn't offering the album to me for free?
Hence the focus of the RIAA on uploaders; they're the low hanging fruit whom is all infringing. Downloaders may or may not depending on the situation.
or something involving Bubbles, a rope, and a closet.
You're thinking of the other creepy old guy that recently died.
Even with the ctrl and alt keys on the right side, the key combo is awkward to execute with one hand, and unlikely to be randomly pressed.
It's as if millions of voices cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced.
The sense of irony is weak with the Iranian dictatorship...
Mixed up I think you have your movie trilogies.