I admit, a vegan diet is not for the faint of heart. Among other things, it makes eating out almost impossible ( I find eating out hard enough as a vegetarian ! ). But if you are aware of the basics regarding getting complete protein and iron, you're OK. BTW, there's no rule that says you need to get all the amino acids at once. So you don't need your beans and your pasta in the one meal. As long as you eat a variety, you'll get what you need.
Human beings were designed (how that occurred is another flamefest;) to run best on meat.
This is a scam, and it's completely unsubstantiated.
There is always a section explicitly for warning pregnant vegetarians about special diet requirements. This is in there to overcome the limitations of a vegetarian diet.
Does it ask them to eat meat ? If not, then it's advice on a healthy vegetarian diet, not how to overcome "limitations" ( it's clear that in this case, there are no such limitations, huh ? ). Pregnant women need a healthy diet, with or without meat. It's possible to have a horribly healthy or unhealthy diet either way, both have their advantages and drawbacks.
till though, it's not much more BLOODY than other games, it's just a little more realistic-feeling..
If you want realism, go with Rainbow 6 ( which isn't at all bloody ). If you really shoot someone, their arms don't go flying off, ala SOF. The game exaggerates the violence much like an overdone horror movie.
It is also much easier to eat meat to make sure that you have all of your necessary proteins rather than deal with having to make sure that you mix the proper foods together to get everything.
Milk has complete protein. Sorry.
BTW, even if you're vegan, it's been shown that it's very difficult to become protein deficient. The main thing vegetarians need to watch are iron and B12 -- incidently, even meat eaters often don't get enough iron and B12.
According to scientific reports having too little saturated fat is actually BAD for you.
It's pretty hard to not get enough saturated fat. But unless you're vegan, a latte (milky coffee ) a day will give you enough.
You can be a vegetarian, or vegan, and eat a healthy diet, but it is a royal pain in the ass. In order to get the correct protein, iron, zinc, and everything else that we normally get in meat products you need to consume many different types of vegetables or you need to take vitamin supplements
This is just plain wrong. For example, milk contains the best quality protein available, and skim milk doesn't come with the dollop of saturated fat that you get with red meat. In fact it's quite the opposite -- because vegetarians think about what they eat ( since the meat eaters are always fudding ), they are more likely to have healthy diets.
Yes. Suffering is life and animals and humans will always suffer in some way.
This logic is dangerous -- you can use the same idea to justify inflicting any kind of suffering for personal gain.
I'm going to go have a steak now.
Make sure to check your cholestrol level next time you visit the doctor (-;
how does having a food supply and clothes make one insensitive? Like it or not, humans are at the top of the food chain. We do with animals as we will. The laws of nature dictate that reality.
What seperates humans from animals ( among other things ) is that humans have ethics, and are not slaves to their desires. Humans do not blindly kill whatever moves because it tastes good -- humans are capable of asking whether or not it is right or wrong to do so. Animals don't do this.
Humans who allow the "laws of nature" to govern and rationalise their behaviour are unfortunately too close to other animals for comfort.
BTW, Animals "recklessly kill each other" for the thrill of it, and it's also "part of nature". Cheers,
in short, they are in this fight to make sure that the current manner in which an artist can be paid stays in place. why?
No, they are not. They are lashing out at Napster, because they are profiteering ( freeloading if you like ) off the fruits of their labour.
no -- for *exactly* the same selfish reasons which you so debase in your post!
Actually, it's Napster's selfishness that bugs them. Fans were freeloading for years and they didn't complain. In fact they explicitly said that they didn't mind their fans swapping copies and bootlegs.
van gogh died hungry in a mental institution or some shit. i'll take van gogh over these posession-posessed versace-suit poseurs any day of the week.
Yeah, of course you'd rather have Van Gogh, because it's easy to freeload off him. The napsterites want the artists to starve. It never occurs to them that if the artists could actually make a living doing art ( instead of having to "get a real job" ), well there'd be more art. But then, the napsterites hardly even care about art. Their primary concern is about getting something for nothing.
get rid of em, let's get us some artists who aren't in it for the money.
This shows how ignorant you are re Metallica. They started off as some obscure little band playing a style of music that no-one listened to. In it for the money ? Hmmm... the obscure stuff they played was hardly a recipe for success. It just happened by a wierd stroke of fate that their style went "into fashion" one day, much like what's happened to Linux.
The attacks on Metallica are, in conclusion, little more than napsterite propoganda, which is primarily intended to smear all napster's opponents as "greedy" ( which is so hypocritical that it's funny, coming from the napsterite mob )
The Metallicas of the world, in it for the bucks alone, because touring is such hard work, they get out. Tough.
The claim that Metallica are "just in it for the money" is completely bogus, and little more than propaganda spun by the napster-ites in a futile attempt to cover the fact that they really don't give a rat's ass about the artists. ( The only artists who'd dissaprove of napster are the "greedy ones", right ? ) BTW, Metallica have allowed and condoned their fans freeloading off them for a long time -- because they are smart enough to know that their fans are dedicated enough to buy whatever they can afford. It's the corporate freeloading that is more offensive to them.
"Free music" is a misnomer. It's more like "Warez music".
I will continue to rip and trade my music with other people who are as passionate about this as me.
The only "passion" here I see from the napster-crowd is passionate selfishness. Basically, they want something for nothing, and to hell with everyone else. The crocodile tears about the "RIAA ripping off the artists" are as silly as the RIAA expressing sympathy for the artists. Neither side cares about the artists, the RIAA just care about their money, and the napsterites just want to freeload.
No, it's not copyright infringement, because they are not trying to pass someone else's work off as their own. They are just choosing an amusing naming scheme for files. I don't think that anyone's likely to believe that their cuckoo noises are really black sabbath recordings, so to claim that they're violating anything is a stretch.
Where I currently live, I would say more than half of the people in this particular area are Hispanic or Portugese at a guess (I've not seen data to back that up.)
There are a lot of areas where this is the case.
he point is neither of those overly broad and stereotyped groups are minorities right here where I am.
Your piont is beside the point. Anglo-saxon whites remain the dominant group in the US ( and probably even where you live ).
At the national level, discrimination based on culture is IMO a political game.
That's a crock. Put yourself in the position of a non-white and try to break into a primarily white group. They ignore you, fob you off and then turn around and categorically deny that there's any bias anywhere. Hypocrites. Since you're not a minority, your comments on what minorities do and do not experience are not very well informed, and in this instance plain wrong. ( Yeah, neither am I. Suffice it to say that people close to me are. ) I don't think the situation would be significantly different if one of the other groups had most of the power -- it's more about networking and the fact that it's easier to network with your own group than it is about outright "racism".
Except the Constitution never acknowledges "intellectual property rights". Instead, it assumes that an author has no inherent rights, and then gives the Congress permisssion to give authors exclusive rights for a limited time.
Still, copyrights are a valuable asset. Is removing them ( and hence removing this asset ) "taking" ? Sure, the creative work isn't property, but the copyright itself is.
In order to resolve all of the issues regarding music distribution and copyright violations, I believe we need to dispose of one majorly flawed assumption: Artists deserve to make money from their art.
We could apply this logic to a lot of things. For example, why do programmers deserve to make money ? Why do we have regulations restricting the number of H1Bs, and also fixing the wages of the H1B programmers ? Why do we have a such thing as a minimum wage ?
Personally, I think that the artists deserve to make money if there are people who are willing to pay to keep their art alive. THere's a basic problem with funding the production of creative works -- you need some kind of distributed payment scheme if the artist is to be funded by ordinary people. Copyright seems to work quite well. Copyright will obviously NOT keep an artist alive if no one wants to hear their music. All it does is enable a fair distributed payment system that essentially says "no freeloading". I know -- a lot of slashdotters have a problem with the "no freeloading" part.
Sorry, but selfishly, expediently and anonymously distributing resources in your own direction is NOT civil disobedience. Civil disobedience is about public protest, and publically defying laws in hope that it will stimulate change. The guy who burnt his draft card was doing "civil disobedience", but the guy who sent in fake medical documents showing him to be unfit for service was merely committing fraud and selectively ignoring the law. Civil disobedience is not expediently ignoring laws that you find inconvenient.
That said, I agree wholeheartedly that labels spend a lot of time screening in order to find what's most likely to sell. It's a process that's guaranteed to generate mediocrity, really.
I'd hardly call my jazz CD collection an example of "mediocrity", even though most of it comes from the larger jazz record labels. Sorry, but that's a gross over-generalisation. I've yet to see a group of brilliant musicians who couldn't get a record deal and made a good effort to do so.
Now, this has always worked for a label. It's great that a label can screen, but there has always been an element of greed, which usually produces a mediocre product, at best.
Gross over generalisation. For example, the jazz labels go after a niche market and target a more sophisticated audience. And those guys would ( and do ) lose their listeners if they start pushing too much crap.
In Jazz music, there's a tradition similar to the Open Source movement - musicians will take one song and start to modify it to their own whims. Charlie Parker used to take other songs and make riffs on them. (He also had to often had to modify a section, usually the bridge, to avoid paying fees!)
Jazz has a long tradition of interpreting and re-interpreting music, for sure. But there's a big difference between interpreting someone else's music and outright copying it. Reinterpreting it has artistic value, but simply copying it does not. Personally, I don't have anything against "stealing" riffs, though if you perform a cover, you should certainly not try to pass it off as your own work.
You make a good point -- it's not hypocrisy when two slashdotters have conflicting opinions. However, when a single person foams at the mouth when the GPL is breached, but doesn't think that copyrights should be enforced ( for example ), that's hypocrisy. And there are a lot of hypocrites on slashdot.
I don't like it, but until recently I didn't have a choice - that's all there was.
I must be hallucinating when I loko at my CD collection. A mix of obscure underground bands that you'd have never heard of, some jazz classics that you may have heard of and some obscure underground jazz musicians who you probably haven't heard of ( unless you're an avant garde jazz fan ). I don't know or care if this music is available on Napster. I'd rather buy the CD than look for clever ways to circumvent the artist's payment ( OK, some of the jazz musicians are dead, but then again, I'd like to support these niche labels anyway )
As for radio, there are a lot of subscriber supported stations which are probably the only example I've seen of anything like the "street performer protocol" actually working. There's also college radio. If there isn't in your area, you can always set one up, provided that there's an audience for it ( there usually is unless you're in a small town )
Until recently music has been a Measurable Commodity. You go to the store buy a physical item, a medium for carrying music/information, which contains music. Recently, though, the digitization of music has made it an Immeasurable Commodity, the medium for carrying music has evolved into electrons traveling over a wire, which cannot be measured.
Nonsense. It's a song either way. One way, you download one file, the other way, you buy one CD. I disagree with those who have the misguided belief that we need to throw away all of our laws and principles because of the so-called "information age".
As I am sure you are aware, Linux refers to just the Linux kernel, which by itself isn't of much use to the majority of users.
Yeah, it's supposed to be a POSIX compliant system. Maybe we should call it X/Open Linux or something ? (-;
Remember, without a great visionary such as RMS as our leader, there wouldn't be any Free (as in speech) Software and the world would be a much worse place.
We'd have BSD and its associated license and variants ( like the artistic license ) with or without the "free" software foundation.
The thing is that the freeloaders are by and large ignoring the law for their personal benefit. They are not doing so as an act of protest ( a fact that is made clear by the anonymity of the supposed acts of "civil disobedience". )
Call it what it is -- freeloading, selectively ignoring the law for personal gain, expediently distributing intangible goods in ones own direction, or whatever. Don't lie and pretend that there's anything noble aboput freeloading.
civil disobedience (svl ds-bd-ns) n. Refusal to obey civil laws in an effort to induce change in governmental policy or legislation, characterized by the use of passive resistance or other nonviolent means.
civil disobedience n : a group's refusal to obey orders in protest against discrimination
Notice that both definitions emphasise public protest. Sorry, you warez guys aren't about "civil disobedience", you're just an expedient, selfish mob. At least fess up and admit it !
Slashdot Mirror
This is a scam, and it's completely unsubstantiated.
There is always a section explicitly for warning pregnant vegetarians about special diet requirements. This is in there to overcome the limitations of a vegetarian diet.
Does it ask them to eat meat ? If not, then it's advice on a healthy vegetarian diet, not how to overcome "limitations" ( it's clear that in this case, there are no such limitations, huh ? ). Pregnant women need a healthy diet, with or without meat. It's possible to have a horribly healthy or unhealthy diet either way, both have their advantages and drawbacks.
If you want realism, go with Rainbow 6 ( which isn't at all bloody ). If you really shoot someone, their arms don't go flying off, ala SOF. The game exaggerates the violence much like an overdone horror movie.
Milk has complete protein. Sorry.
BTW, even if you're vegan, it's been shown that it's very difficult to become protein deficient. The main thing vegetarians need to watch are iron and B12 -- incidently, even meat eaters often don't get enough iron and B12.
According to scientific reports having too little saturated fat is actually BAD for you.
It's pretty hard to not get enough saturated fat. But unless you're vegan, a latte (milky coffee ) a day will give you enough.
This is just plain wrong. For example, milk contains the best quality protein available, and skim milk doesn't come with the dollop of saturated fat that you get with red meat. In fact it's quite the opposite -- because vegetarians think about what they eat ( since the meat eaters are always fudding ), they are more likely to have healthy diets.
Yes. Suffering is life and animals and humans will always suffer in some way.
This logic is dangerous -- you can use the same idea to justify inflicting any kind of suffering for personal gain.
I'm going to go have a steak now.
Make sure to check your cholestrol level next time you visit the doctor (-;
What seperates humans from animals ( among other things ) is that humans have ethics, and are not slaves to their desires. Humans do not blindly kill whatever moves because it tastes good -- humans are capable of asking whether or not it is right or wrong to do so. Animals don't do this.
Humans who allow the "laws of nature" to govern and rationalise their behaviour are unfortunately too close to other animals for comfort.
BTW, Animals "recklessly kill each other" for the thrill of it, and it's also "part of nature". Cheers,
No, they are not. They are lashing out at Napster, because they are profiteering ( freeloading if you like ) off the fruits of their labour.
no -- for *exactly* the same selfish reasons which you so debase in your post!
Actually, it's Napster's selfishness that bugs them. Fans were freeloading for years and they didn't complain. In fact they explicitly said that they didn't mind their fans swapping copies and bootlegs.
van gogh died hungry in a mental institution or some shit. i'll take van gogh over these posession-posessed versace-suit poseurs any day of the week.
Yeah, of course you'd rather have Van Gogh, because it's easy to freeload off him. The napsterites want the artists to starve. It never occurs to them that if the artists could actually make a living doing art ( instead of having to "get a real job" ), well there'd be more art. But then, the napsterites hardly even care about art. Their primary concern is about getting something for nothing.
get rid of em, let's get us some artists who aren't in it for the money.
This shows how ignorant you are re Metallica. They started off as some obscure little band playing a style of music that no-one listened to. In it for the money ? Hmmm ... the obscure stuff they played was hardly a recipe for success. It just happened by a wierd stroke of fate that their style went "into fashion" one day, much like what's happened to Linux.
The attacks on Metallica are, in conclusion, little more than napsterite propoganda, which is primarily intended to smear all napster's opponents as "greedy" ( which is so hypocritical that it's funny, coming from the napsterite mob )
The claim that Metallica are "just in it for the money" is completely bogus, and little more than propaganda spun by the napster-ites in a futile attempt to cover the fact that they really don't give a rat's ass about the artists. ( The only artists who'd dissaprove of napster are the "greedy ones", right ? ) BTW, Metallica have allowed and condoned their fans freeloading off them for a long time -- because they are smart enough to know that their fans are dedicated enough to buy whatever they can afford. It's the corporate freeloading that is more offensive to them.
"Free music" is a misnomer. It's more like "Warez music".
I will continue to rip and trade my music with other people who are as passionate about this as me.
The only "passion" here I see from the napster-crowd is passionate selfishness. Basically, they want something for nothing, and to hell with everyone else. The crocodile tears about the "RIAA ripping off the artists" are as silly as the RIAA expressing sympathy for the artists. Neither side cares about the artists, the RIAA just care about their money, and the napsterites just want to freeload.
No, it's not copyright infringement, because they are not trying to pass someone else's work off as their own. They are just choosing an amusing naming scheme for files. I don't think that anyone's likely to believe that their cuckoo noises are really black sabbath recordings, so to claim that they're violating anything is a stretch.
There are a lot of areas where this is the case.
he point is neither of those overly broad and stereotyped groups are minorities right here where I am.
Your piont is beside the point. Anglo-saxon whites remain the dominant group in the US ( and probably even where you live ).
At the national level, discrimination based on culture is IMO a political game.
That's a crock. Put yourself in the position of a non-white and try to break into a primarily white group. They ignore you, fob you off and then turn around and categorically deny that there's any bias anywhere. Hypocrites. Since you're not a minority, your comments on what minorities do and do not experience are not very well informed, and in this instance plain wrong. ( Yeah, neither am I. Suffice it to say that people close to me are. ) I don't think the situation would be significantly different if one of the other groups had most of the power -- it's more about networking and the fact that it's easier to network with your own group than it is about outright "racism".
Still, copyrights are a valuable asset. Is removing them ( and hence removing this asset ) "taking" ? Sure, the creative work isn't property, but the copyright itself is.
Why trim those off ? They're the only ones whose music is worth buying anyway (-;
What, he's going to kick the habit ? (-;
We could apply this logic to a lot of things. For example, why do programmers deserve to make money ? Why do we have regulations restricting the number of H1Bs, and also fixing the wages of the H1B programmers ? Why do we have a such thing as a minimum wage ?
Personally, I think that the artists deserve to make money if there are people who are willing to pay to keep their art alive. THere's a basic problem with funding the production of creative works -- you need some kind of distributed payment scheme if the artist is to be funded by ordinary people. Copyright seems to work quite well. Copyright will obviously NOT keep an artist alive if no one wants to hear their music. All it does is enable a fair distributed payment system that essentially says "no freeloading". I know -- a lot of slashdotters have a problem with the "no freeloading" part.
Cheers,
Sorry, but selfishly, expediently and anonymously distributing resources in your own direction is NOT civil disobedience. Civil disobedience is about public protest, and publically defying laws in hope that it will stimulate change. The guy who burnt his draft card was doing "civil disobedience", but the guy who sent in fake medical documents showing him to be unfit for service was merely committing fraud and selectively ignoring the law. Civil disobedience is not expediently ignoring laws that you find inconvenient.
I'd hardly call my jazz CD collection an example of "mediocrity", even though most of it comes from the larger jazz record labels. Sorry, but that's a gross over-generalisation. I've yet to see a group of brilliant musicians who couldn't get a record deal and made a good effort to do so.
Gross over generalisation. For example, the jazz labels go after a niche market and target a more sophisticated audience. And those guys would ( and do ) lose their listeners if they start pushing too much crap.
Cheers,
Jazz has a long tradition of interpreting and re-interpreting music, for sure. But there's a big difference between interpreting someone else's music and outright copying it. Reinterpreting it has artistic value, but simply copying it does not. Personally, I don't have anything against "stealing" riffs, though if you perform a cover, you should certainly not try to pass it off as your own work.
I must be hallucinating when I loko at my CD collection. A mix of obscure underground bands that you'd have never heard of, some jazz classics that you may have heard of and some obscure underground jazz musicians who you probably haven't heard of ( unless you're an avant garde jazz fan ). I don't know or care if this music is available on Napster. I'd rather buy the CD than look for clever ways to circumvent the artist's payment ( OK, some of the jazz musicians are dead, but then again, I'd like to support these niche labels anyway )
As for radio, there are a lot of subscriber supported stations which are probably the only example I've seen of anything like the "street performer protocol" actually working. There's also college radio. If there isn't in your area, you can always set one up, provided that there's an audience for it ( there usually is unless you're in a small town )
Nonsense. It's a song either way. One way, you download one file, the other way, you buy one CD. I disagree with those who have the misguided belief that we need to throw away all of our laws and principles because of the so-called "information age".
Yeah, it's supposed to be a POSIX compliant system. Maybe we should call it X/Open Linux or something ? (-;
Remember, without a great visionary such as RMS as our leader, there wouldn't be any Free (as in speech) Software and the world would be a much worse place.
We'd have BSD and its associated license and variants ( like the artistic license ) with or without the "free" software foundation.
Call it what it is -- freeloading, selectively ignoring the law for personal gain, expediently distributing intangible goods in ones own direction, or whatever. Don't lie and pretend that there's anything noble aboput freeloading.
civil disobedience (svl ds-bd-ns) n. Refusal to obey civil laws in an effort to induce change in governmental policy or legislation, characterized by the use of passive resistance or other nonviolent means.
civil disobedience n : a group's refusal to obey orders in protest against discrimination
Notice that both definitions emphasise public protest. Sorry, you warez guys aren't about "civil disobedience", you're just an expedient, selfish mob. At least fess up and admit it !