Shotgunning four drinks one after the other (binging, basically) is one thing. Drinking four drinks over the course of a six hour evening is something else.
Actually, many Italians will drink a glass of wine with breakfast, lunch, and dinner. Also, as someone pointed out above, the standard for one drink in Italy seems to be 10 g of ethanol, quite a bit lower than it is in the US.
Many people who suspect their spouses of affairs also observe this ability too (knowing in which rooms a guest's been in). Maybe they can smell the perfume/cologne? It's my experience that the "other woman" (or "other man") wants to be detected in order to force a confrontation between the committed couple, and, thus, will intentionally leave clues to be found (strong perfume/cologne, condom wrapper, undergarments, etc.) After all, they have much less to lose than the one who is involved in a committed relationship. Detecting infidelity doesn't necessarily require a keen sense of smell.
Wouldn't it be more accurate to say: "ANYTHING you do online, out on the street, in your backyard, in your home in front of a window, or anywhere near a camera (whether you know it's there or not) is NOT private! PERIOD!"? If a picture of you ends up online along with your name, does that give everyone else the right to find it by searching for your name?
Think about it. Even if you consider the extent of the problem, a "cure" of this magnitude, the potential is to be a once or twice a year (or less) application. Also, given the cost of maintenance, I would have to say a single injection will be in th $4000-5000 range. Wouldn't you pay it to be free of diabetes for a year? Don't worry, I'm sure by the time it reaches the market, they will have engineered it to be a once daily pill, so it will appear much more affordable to the consumer. "Cure" is a dirty word in the pharmaceutical industry.
It's kind of hard to use my free minutes when I can't find my phone. Hmmm, I wonder if $30 a year is worth it to help me find my phone once a month (that's about all I used Skype for anyway.)
I'm more concerned about what constitutes a "background check". Can they check your credit history? What about contacting previous landlords? Can they search the web for comments you've made on internet forums? What about "letters to the editor" you've written to local newspapers (which are increasingly being digitized and made available to internet search engines)? Just what about your history should employers be allowed to use in making hiring decisions? It's not just arrest records that HR departments are interested in when deciding whether to hire you.
The Russian government seems to have already been convicted in most people's minds. But it just doesn't add up. Why would they use such an obscure poison that's easy to detect? When someone gets sick really fast, and their hair starts falling out, of course the doctors are going to test him for radioactive substances, and of course they're going to find the polonium. If you don't care who knows it was an assassination, why not just use cyanide or strychnine or ricin? At least those are much easier to obtain, and wouldn't immediately cast suspicion on government labs or nuclear facilities. I think he was poisoned by someone who wanted to turn the Western public against Russia. Someone who is rich and well-connected. Someone like Boris Berezovsky or maybe Akhmed Zakayev.
Oh, yeah, the article doesn't mention how the polonium was traced to the nuclear plant. Anyone know?
Google Answers has been around for a while, and I don't think it would ever reach the scale that would be necessary to make it profitable for them. If you add up the amounts offered for all the questions in a day and multiply by 0.25 (or whatever Google's take is) you get a pretty insignificant amount for a multi-billion dollar company. A drop in the bucket. And, when you figure in the costs of hosting and administering the site, overseeing all the disputes and whatnot, it becomes more of a burden than anything else. It was a good service, but it just wasn't going to work for them financially.
How about the UK government invests in cameras that monitor/. for dupes. Whenever an "editor" green lights an "article" that is a duplicate, a voice could come on a loudspeaker that says, "Oy! We already 'eard about that a few weeks ago!"
I don't recall ever hearing "arks". Perhaps you're thinking of "axe", a regional pronunciation of "ask", which originated in England--Chaucer used it--and is now common in some parts of the US.
I've heard people say "is" twice in a row like this, but this is the first time I've actually seem someone write (or type) it. Where did this come from? Do people say this outside America as well? For over twenty years, I never noticed this, but now I'm hearing it all over the place. The thing is, is that this sounds kind of funny to me.
Just to bring another point of view here, how do you know that he and his wife actually voted? Maybe he knew that he wasn't going to get any votes (or maybe he didn't campaign at all) and he didn't vote or voted for someone else so he could claim election fraud. Just a thought.
It's a good article, in particular because the link at the end of the page gives a link to 10 reasons the PS2 won't be able to repeat the success of the PS2. [1up.com]
No, I don't think, what with all the new consoles coming out, that the PS2 will be able to repeat its own success.;)
I'd like to reply to that guy who said that thing about welcoming the Overloads and Soviet Russia and all that. I think that comment was spot on. Spot on. If anyone agrees with me, please... start a new thread.
This is the first I've heard of this. How could he be told he could not resign? Was he bound to his duty by some law? I've heard of people submitting a resignation only to have it "rejected", but I always thought this was more of a request than an order. This is an earnest question.
We don't even know what this "brain gene" does.... just that some people have it.
Neanderthals had larger brains than modern humans. The people who have it tend to live in the regions where Neanderthals did. If this gene did indeed come from Neanderthals, it would probably result in a larger cranium. I think that's what the researchers were getting at.
OK, I'll risk a little karma. Are you so certain that there are absolutely no differences between people from different lineages that you're unwilling to accept any evidence, no matter how strong, to the contrary? In recent times, the theory that humans are so interbred that there can be no statistically significant differences among populations has become a religion. Any evidence to the contrary is immediately dismissed.
Differences don't have to mean superiority or inferiority. Would you say that a coyote is inferior (or superior) to a wolf? How about subspecies that have different coat colorings to better blend in with their surroundings? Do we have to judge one or the other as inferior? Do we have to say that one is worth less than the other?
I think some people have become so wary of racism (like the parent) that they see in any finding of differences among populations only their potential for bigotry and oppression. Maybe the larger craniums of Europeans is evidence of greater intelligence, maybe it isn't. But let's not ignore scientific facts because of fear of racism.
Slashdot Mirror
Shotgunning four drinks one after the other (binging, basically) is one thing. Drinking four drinks over the course of a six hour evening is something else.
Actually, many Italians will drink a glass of wine with breakfast, lunch, and dinner. Also, as someone pointed out above, the standard for one drink in Italy seems to be 10 g of ethanol, quite a bit lower than it is in the US.
Wouldn't it be more accurate to say: "ANYTHING you do online, out on the street, in your backyard, in your home in front of a window, or anywhere near a camera (whether you know it's there or not) is NOT private! PERIOD!"? If a picture of you ends up online along with your name, does that give everyone else the right to find it by searching for your name?
It's kind of hard to use my free minutes when I can't find my phone. Hmmm, I wonder if $30 a year is worth it to help me find my phone once a month (that's about all I used Skype for anyway.)
I'm more concerned about what constitutes a "background check". Can they check your credit history? What about contacting previous landlords? Can they search the web for comments you've made on internet forums? What about "letters to the editor" you've written to local newspapers (which are increasingly being digitized and made available to internet search engines)? Just what about your history should employers be allowed to use in making hiring decisions? It's not just arrest records that HR departments are interested in when deciding whether to hire you.
Those pics only take up a quarter of my monitor. Oh, wait...
He forgot to mention how slowly axions travel.
The RFID chips are in the drinks. As you leave, they scan your belly so they know how much your tab was.
You can keep saying it, but that doesn't make it true. Click here and you'll see that it costs about $750-$800. $750 > $600. $750 >> $500.
2007 should be the year...
I'd hold off on having your tombstone inscribed just yet. You might not finish the plane until 2008.
The Russian government seems to have already been convicted in most people's minds. But it just doesn't add up. Why would they use such an obscure poison that's easy to detect? When someone gets sick really fast, and their hair starts falling out, of course the doctors are going to test him for radioactive substances, and of course they're going to find the polonium. If you don't care who knows it was an assassination, why not just use cyanide or strychnine or ricin? At least those are much easier to obtain, and wouldn't immediately cast suspicion on government labs or nuclear facilities. I think he was poisoned by someone who wanted to turn the Western public against Russia. Someone who is rich and well-connected. Someone like Boris Berezovsky or maybe Akhmed Zakayev.
Oh, yeah, the article doesn't mention how the polonium was traced to the nuclear plant. Anyone know?
Google Answers has been around for a while, and I don't think it would ever reach the scale that would be necessary to make it profitable for them. If you add up the amounts offered for all the questions in a day and multiply by 0.25 (or whatever Google's take is) you get a pretty insignificant amount for a multi-billion dollar company. A drop in the bucket. And, when you figure in the costs of hosting and administering the site, overseeing all the disputes and whatnot, it becomes more of a burden than anything else. It was a good service, but it just wasn't going to work for them financially.
Strikes me as true, and as always when claiming something is obvious, it begs the question "how come you didn't think of it then?"
Isn't the whole point here that KSR did think of it, and they just thought it was too obvious to patent?
How about the UK government invests in cameras that monitor /. for dupes. Whenever an "editor" green lights an "article" that is a duplicate, a voice could come on a loudspeaker that says, "Oy! We already 'eard about that a few weeks ago!"
PS, my pet hate is when people "arks" questions.
I don't recall ever hearing "arks". Perhaps you're thinking of "axe", a regional pronunciation of "ask", which originated in England--Chaucer used it--and is now common in some parts of the US.
The funny thing is, is that...
I've heard people say "is" twice in a row like this, but this is the first time I've actually seem someone write (or type) it. Where did this come from? Do people say this outside America as well? For over twenty years, I never noticed this, but now I'm hearing it all over the place. The thing is, is that this sounds kind of funny to me.
That's gotta be a violation of Google's terms of service.
With the exception of some guy in 1889 (it didn't catch on), that prick was Heinlein himself. [jessesword.com]
Ah ha! He's a prick. I always knew there was a reason I'd never heard of him.
Just to bring another point of view here, how do you know that he and his wife actually voted? Maybe he knew that he wasn't going to get any votes (or maybe he didn't campaign at all) and he didn't vote or voted for someone else so he could claim election fraud. Just a thought.
It's a good article, in particular because the link at the end of the page gives a link to 10 reasons the PS2 won't be able to repeat the success of the PS2. [1up.com]
;)
No, I don't think, what with all the new consoles coming out, that the PS2 will be able to repeat its own success.
I'd like to reply to that guy who said that thing about welcoming the Overloads and Soviet Russia and all that. I think that comment was spot on. Spot on. If anyone agrees with me, please... start a new thread.
This is the first I've heard of this. How could he be told he could not resign? Was he bound to his duty by some law? I've heard of people submitting a resignation only to have it "rejected", but I always thought this was more of a request than an order. This is an earnest question.
We don't even know what this "brain gene" does.... just that some people have it.
Neanderthals had larger brains than modern humans. The people who have it tend to live in the regions where Neanderthals did. If this gene did indeed come from Neanderthals, it would probably result in a larger cranium. I think that's what the researchers were getting at.
OK, I'll risk a little karma. Are you so certain that there are absolutely no differences between people from different lineages that you're unwilling to accept any evidence, no matter how strong, to the contrary? In recent times, the theory that humans are so interbred that there can be no statistically significant differences among populations has become a religion. Any evidence to the contrary is immediately dismissed.
Differences don't have to mean superiority or inferiority. Would you say that a coyote is inferior (or superior) to a wolf? How about subspecies that have different coat colorings to better blend in with their surroundings? Do we have to judge one or the other as inferior? Do we have to say that one is worth less than the other?
I think some people have become so wary of racism (like the parent) that they see in any finding of differences among populations only their potential for bigotry and oppression. Maybe the larger craniums of Europeans is evidence of greater intelligence, maybe it isn't. But let's not ignore scientific facts because of fear of racism.