Rich old people don't have poor eyesight, poor old people do. Rich old people can have their cataracts, nearsightedness, age-related farsightedness, and astigmatism completely cured for $15,000, the price of two CrystaLens implant surgeries.
I'm 60 and have one in my left eye, my vision is better than 20/20 at all distances. My eyesight (which used to be incredibly nearsighted as well as age-related farsighted; I had contacts AND reading glasses) is better than most 20 year olds. I now need no corrective lenses at all.
Hooray for technology!
You will be assimilated... if you can afford it.
Maybe Forbes is for poor old people who wish they were rich?
Except that she didn't. Zuse envisioned Plankalkül
So? Da Vinci not only envisioned, but drew plans of, airplanes. But I don't see anyone crediting him with their invention. Because, you see, having a notion that something can be done is not the same as doing it. To be credited with inventing something, you have to actually make that something exist.
He said American cup, America has cups and pints and quarts, not litres and millilitres. I imagine 250ml would be pretty much a standard cup anywhere else.
While the only argument every kneejerker gives is,"If you can't make money on media, no one would ever write a book again!
It's not a knee jerk argument, it's a perfectly valid one.
No, it isn't. Free sells, ask Cory Doctorow. He gives all his books away for free at BoingBoing, yet still managed to hit the New York Times best seller list. He credits his giving books away to being on that list.
Don't try to sell a novel, sell BOOKS. Don't sell movies, sell DVDs. Don't sell music, sell CDs. The fact is, the media companies themselves saw dollar signs; "gee, we can distribute this digital crap for almost nothing! We have to get folks to hate physical media so we don't have to produce it!"
The fact is, every non-RIAA study shows that piracy helps sales. As Doctorow (again) says, "nobody ever went broke from piracy, but many artists have starved from obscurity."
If your book/song/movie is good, people will buy it even though they can get it from Pirate Bay or Boing Boing.
I knew a guy ten or fifteen years ago that had had the same problem, were you a Quake player? If so, was your in-game and internet name "crash"? I've lost track of all those guys.
At any rate, the top 1% of taxpayers don't draw on 20% of the budget.
No, they don't. They draw on almost 100%. Who's running your telcoms and radio and TV stations? The 1%. We need the FCC to keep them in line. Who owns those big trucks that haul everything and cause most of the road damage? The 1%. Who leases public lands for oil exploration? The 1%. Who need the coast guard? The 1% almost exclusively. Who does the military protect? The 1%.
Who need the FBI? Not the bottom 1%! In fact, the FBI and DEA and BATF only benefit the 1% and the bottom 1% fear them.
The bottom 1% (probably the bottom 10%) use almost no government at all. They don't have any use whatever for the police, because if a poor man calls the cops he's usually the one to go to jail (and your local government gets federal grant money for cops and cop equipment). Social programs for the poor are very niggardly in the US compared to civilized nations.
When my grandfather was a young man, only the rich paid federal income taxes. How about we go back to doing it that way? Government benefits primarily the rich, the rich should be paying the lion's share of it (if not all, like in Grandpa's day).
We don't have a revenue problem in the US - we have a spending problem.
We have both a spending and revenue problem. I'd legalize, tax, and regulate drugs, disband the ATF and the DEA and the TSA and most of Homeland Security, but I'd keep FEMA (who benefits the most in a catastrophe, the guy with the ruined ten million dollar house filled with expensive items, or a renter whose most expensive posession is probably a used car? I'd cut the military in half or smaller. I'd cut most grants, and all grants to corporations. What would you cut?
But we can't cut our way out. As another poster already mentioned, federal taxes are lower than at any time since Truman. The rich are just being the greedy, selfish bastards one has to be in order to become or stay rich.
Nonsense, coffee cups come in all sizes, from your dinky little four ounce cups to a huge full pint cup. A cup is exactly half a pint, a little less than 1/4 of a litre.
It's the same thing as with wine. Drinking some wine everyday isn't good for your heart because the wine is good for you. It's because of the antioxidants that were in the grapes.
That's not what the Mayo Clinic says. It does say that antioxidants are good for the heart, but it says grape juice is possibly as good.
Does grape juice offer the same heart benefits as red wine? Answer from Martha Grogan, M.D. Possibly.
Furthermore, I would like to know who paid for this study.
Maybe you should get another cup... or maybe you had too much and the jitters kept you from reading and digesting the summary, which stated right up front that it's the American Cancer Society?
There is a huge industry around coffee abuse.
How could one abuse coffee? Inject it intraveniously?
One would think that the submitter (let alone editors) would be technically competent enough that we don't have to google the acronym for the foreign telephone company they're writing about.
Of course, you could always try getting up earlier in the morning, and catch the store before it closes.
He shouldn't have to. If the grocery store only sold beer from 11:00 PM to 3:00 AM I'd never drink; this is the same thing. It's really, really stupid, almost as stupid as trying to defend the stupid practice.
Easily debunked, unless you think "ambition" only means "the love of money". There are other ambitions besides wealth, and they're mostly more important. Example: Linus was pretty damned ambitious wanting to write a free OS. That was a good ambition and nothing is evil about it whatever, Steve "Linux is a cancer" Ballmer notwithstanding.
The love of money is the root of all evil, but it isn't the root of all ambition.
Definition of FLAUNT intransitive verb 1: to display or obtrude oneself to public notice <a great flaunting crowd â" Charles Dickens> 2: to wave or flutter showily <the flag flaunts in the breeze> transitive verb 1: to display ostentatiously or impudently : parade <flaunting his superiority> 2: to treat contemptuously <flaunted the rules â" Louis Untermeyer>
Daily use of any amount of an addictive substance will cause addiction.
I think everyone knows that in the long run, this does more harm than good.
I can cite studies that show all sorts of beneficial effects of coffee, but I have yet to run across a single one that shows deleterious effects. You got a citation, coward?
You sure it doesn't mean that those with the physical constitution to withstand 4 cups of coffee are resistant to oral cancers?
Withstand four cups of coffee?? That doesn't make sense at all, most coffee drinkers I know drink at least that much, and most non-coffee drinkers I know don't drink it because they just don't like the taste. The only people I know who hold it down to two cups are older folks; caffiene makes them shake.
And yes, correlation doesn't prove causation, but the fact that it's cancers of body parts that the coffee physically touches sure indicates a causation. I mean, look -- dropping a rock on your foot correlates with a painful foot. But correlation does not prove causation, so maybe it's just coincidence that it always hurts when you drop a rock on your foot?
I seldom rent DVDs, but I do buy them. The computer that I can display on the TV is Linux, and I don't want to watch movies on a notebook.
I've never seen the advantage of NetFlix anyway, whether DVDs or streaming. Hell, you can't download hamburgers from the internet, but you can get Red Box movies at any grocery store.
It is self evident that the majority of people do not hate record companies and the BPI or else they wouldn't fucking sign up with them.
The majority of people don't sign up with them. In fact, the majority of people are not musicians. And even among musicians, the vast VAST majority don't. I know quite a few musicians who've been offered major label contracts and refused them, but most aren't even offered them.
Only one in twenty five albums makes a profit. The lablels seem pretty damned bad at marketing and distribution, or most label artists would be a lot better off financially.
As long as our government continue to codify crimes into the financial system, the system will continue to act criminally.
I don't think I understand you. Are you saying we should legalize fraud and bank robbery? Almost all crimes are financial crimes, except ones like public drunkenness and murder (which sometimes involves money).
If we restored the former definition of the word "crime"
I wasn't aware that the definition had changed? I'm 60, and I've seen no definition of that word in my lifetime, although a lot of other words have been redefined.
novel concept- forbid crime
???? Crime is that which is legally forbidden -- insider trading, polluting, theft, fraud, prostitution, spitting on the sidewalk.
Sorry, I simply could not understand what you were trying to convey. Is this a generational thing or something?
Seriously? Did you not RTFS? "The study, published in the American Journal of Epidemiology, was conducted using the Cancer Prevention Study II. The large cohort study began in 1982 by the American Cancer Society. Researchers were able to examine 968,432 men and women, none of whom had cancer at the time of their enrollment in the study."
What is someone who doesn't trust science fucking doing at slashdot, anyway? Go back to Sports Illustrated and leave us nerds alone, dumbass.
When referring to food and drink, "rich" does not mean "expensive," it means "sumptuous". Rich food is not necessarily expensive, and expensive food is not necessarily rich.
Coffee is indeed sumptuous, but it isn't expensive unless you're stupid enough to buy it at Starbucks or even McDonald's. A ten dollar can of coffee will give you a fresh pot every morning for all month long. Ten dollars will buy you a dozen beers, or four two litre bottles of soda, or two gallons of milk. Coffee is one of the least expensive drinks there are (unless, as I said, you're a rich retard who's too lazy to brew your own).
Her contributions had a direct influence on how programming languages evolved.
Hopper practically invented programming languages. Before her, all programming was done in machine code.
In 1952 she had an operational compiler. "Nobody believed that," she said. "I had a running compiler and nobody would touch it. They told me computers could only do arithmetic."[
Slashdot Mirror
Rich old people don't have poor eyesight, poor old people do. Rich old people can have their cataracts, nearsightedness, age-related farsightedness, and astigmatism completely cured for $15,000, the price of two CrystaLens implant surgeries.
I'm 60 and have one in my left eye, my vision is better than 20/20 at all distances. My eyesight (which used to be incredibly nearsighted as well as age-related farsighted; I had contacts AND reading glasses) is better than most 20 year olds. I now need no corrective lenses at all.
Hooray for technology!
You will be assimilated... if you can afford it.
Maybe Forbes is for poor old people who wish they were rich?
Except that she didn't. Zuse envisioned Plankalkül
So? Da Vinci not only envisioned, but drew plans of, airplanes. But I don't see anyone crediting him with their invention. Because, you see, having a notion that something can be done is not the same as doing it. To be credited with inventing something, you have to actually make that something exist.
Hopper invented it. Zuse did not.
He said American cup, America has cups and pints and quarts, not litres and millilitres. I imagine 250ml would be pretty much a standard cup anywhere else.
No, it isn't. Free sells, ask Cory Doctorow. He gives all his books away for free at BoingBoing, yet still managed to hit the New York Times best seller list. He credits his giving books away to being on that list.
Don't try to sell a novel, sell BOOKS. Don't sell movies, sell DVDs. Don't sell music, sell CDs. The fact is, the media companies themselves saw dollar signs; "gee, we can distribute this digital crap for almost nothing! We have to get folks to hate physical media so we don't have to produce it!"
The fact is, every non-RIAA study shows that piracy helps sales. As Doctorow (again) says, "nobody ever went broke from piracy, but many artists have starved from obscurity."
If your book/song/movie is good, people will buy it even though they can get it from Pirate Bay or Boing Boing.
That's kind of the problem; it DOESN'T pay bills.
Sure it does, it pays the rich trader's bills. Like bank robbery, it harms society but pays the bills.
it's a hang-over from when i had RSI
I knew a guy ten or fifteen years ago that had had the same problem, were you a Quake player? If so, was your in-game and internet name "crash"? I've lost track of all those guys.
At any rate, the top 1% of taxpayers don't draw on 20% of the budget.
No, they don't. They draw on almost 100%. Who's running your telcoms and radio and TV stations? The 1%. We need the FCC to keep them in line. Who owns those big trucks that haul everything and cause most of the road damage? The 1%. Who leases public lands for oil exploration? The 1%. Who need the coast guard? The 1% almost exclusively. Who does the military protect? The 1%.
Who need the FBI? Not the bottom 1%! In fact, the FBI and DEA and BATF only benefit the 1% and the bottom 1% fear them.
The bottom 1% (probably the bottom 10%) use almost no government at all. They don't have any use whatever for the police, because if a poor man calls the cops he's usually the one to go to jail (and your local government gets federal grant money for cops and cop equipment). Social programs for the poor are very niggardly in the US compared to civilized nations.
When my grandfather was a young man, only the rich paid federal income taxes. How about we go back to doing it that way? Government benefits primarily the rich, the rich should be paying the lion's share of it (if not all, like in Grandpa's day).
We don't have a revenue problem in the US - we have a spending problem.
We have both a spending and revenue problem. I'd legalize, tax, and regulate drugs, disband the ATF and the DEA and the TSA and most of Homeland Security, but I'd keep FEMA (who benefits the most in a catastrophe, the guy with the ruined ten million dollar house filled with expensive items, or a renter whose most expensive posession is probably a used car? I'd cut the military in half or smaller. I'd cut most grants, and all grants to corporations. What would you cut?
But we can't cut our way out. As another poster already mentioned, federal taxes are lower than at any time since Truman. The rich are just being the greedy, selfish bastards one has to be in order to become or stay rich.
Nonsense, coffee cups come in all sizes, from your dinky little four ounce cups to a huge full pint cup. A cup is exactly half a pint, a little less than 1/4 of a litre.
It's the same thing as with wine. Drinking some wine everyday isn't good for your heart because the wine is good for you. It's because of the antioxidants that were in the grapes.
That's not what the Mayo Clinic says. It does say that antioxidants are good for the heart, but it says grape juice is possibly as good.
Not scientifically proven, in other words.
Furthermore, I would like to know who paid for this study.
Maybe you should get another cup... or maybe you had too much and the jitters kept you from reading and digesting the summary, which stated right up front that it's the American Cancer Society?
There is a huge industry around coffee abuse.
How could one abuse coffee? Inject it intraveniously?
One would think that the submitter (let alone editors) would be technically competent enough that we don't have to google the acronym for the foreign telephone company they're writing about.
One would be wrong, however.
Of course, you could always try getting up earlier in the morning, and catch the store before it closes.
He shouldn't have to. If the grocery store only sold beer from 11:00 PM to 3:00 AM I'd never drink; this is the same thing. It's really, really stupid, almost as stupid as trying to defend the stupid practice.
Ambition is the root of all evil.
Easily debunked, unless you think "ambition" only means "the love of money". There are other ambitions besides wealth, and they're mostly more important. Example: Linus was pretty damned ambitious wanting to write a free OS. That was a good ambition and nothing is evil about it whatever, Steve "Linux is a cancer" Ballmer notwithstanding.
The love of money is the root of all evil, but it isn't the root of all ambition.
Definition of FLAUNT
intransitive verb
1: to display or obtrude oneself to public notice <a great flaunting crowd â" Charles Dickens>
2: to wave or flutter showily <the flag flaunts in the breeze>
transitive verb
1: to display ostentatiously or impudently : parade <flaunting his superiority>
2: to treat contemptuously <flaunted the rules â" Louis Untermeyer>
www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/flaunt
Four cups a day That's the addict limit.
Daily use of any amount of an addictive substance will cause addiction.
I think everyone knows that in the long run, this does more harm than good.
I can cite studies that show all sorts of beneficial effects of coffee, but I have yet to run across a single one that shows deleterious effects. You got a citation, coward?
You sure it doesn't mean that those with the physical constitution to withstand 4 cups of coffee are resistant to oral cancers?
Withstand four cups of coffee?? That doesn't make sense at all, most coffee drinkers I know drink at least that much, and most non-coffee drinkers I know don't drink it because they just don't like the taste. The only people I know who hold it down to two cups are older folks; caffiene makes them shake.
And yes, correlation doesn't prove causation, but the fact that it's cancers of body parts that the coffee physically touches sure indicates a causation. I mean, look -- dropping a rock on your foot correlates with a painful foot. But correlation does not prove causation, so maybe it's just coincidence that it always hurts when you drop a rock on your foot?
I seldom rent DVDs, but I do buy them. The computer that I can display on the TV is Linux, and I don't want to watch movies on a notebook.
I've never seen the advantage of NetFlix anyway, whether DVDs or streaming. Hell, you can't download hamburgers from the internet, but you can get Red Box movies at any grocery store.
I just don't get it.
It is self evident that the majority of people do not hate record companies and the BPI or else they wouldn't fucking sign up with them.
The majority of people don't sign up with them. In fact, the majority of people are not musicians. And even among musicians, the vast VAST majority don't. I know quite a few musicians who've been offered major label contracts and refused them, but most aren't even offered them.
Only one in twenty five albums makes a profit. The lablels seem pretty damned bad at marketing and distribution, or most label artists would be a lot better off financially.
As long as our government continue to codify crimes into the financial system, the system will continue to act criminally.
I don't think I understand you. Are you saying we should legalize fraud and bank robbery? Almost all crimes are financial crimes, except ones like public drunkenness and murder (which sometimes involves money).
If we restored the former definition of the word "crime"
I wasn't aware that the definition had changed? I'm 60, and I've seen no definition of that word in my lifetime, although a lot of other words have been redefined.
novel concept- forbid crime
????
Crime is that which is legally forbidden -- insider trading, polluting, theft, fraud, prostitution, spitting on the sidewalk.
Sorry, I simply could not understand what you were trying to convey. Is this a generational thing or something?
I'm VERY skeptical.
Seriously? Did you not RTFS? "The study, published in the American Journal of Epidemiology, was conducted using the Cancer Prevention Study II. The large cohort study began in 1982 by the American Cancer Society. Researchers were able to examine 968,432 men and women, none of whom had cancer at the time of their enrollment in the study."
What is someone who doesn't trust science fucking doing at slashdot, anyway? Go back to Sports Illustrated and leave us nerds alone, dumbass.
When referring to food and drink, "rich" does not mean "expensive," it means "sumptuous". Rich food is not necessarily expensive, and expensive food is not necessarily rich.
Coffee is indeed sumptuous, but it isn't expensive unless you're stupid enough to buy it at Starbucks or even McDonald's. A ten dollar can of coffee will give you a fresh pot every morning for all month long. Ten dollars will buy you a dozen beers, or four two litre bottles of soda, or two gallons of milk. Coffee is one of the least expensive drinks there are (unless, as I said, you're a rich retard who's too lazy to brew your own).
I think you could use a cup or two right now...
World's first nerd? Hardly. In the first place, the word "nerd" didn't exist until 1954 when Dr. Suess coined it in "If I Ran The Zoo".
Second, you don't consider Newton to be a nerd? How about the guy who invented the wheel or agriculture or tamed fire? Those people were all nerds.
What about Kowalski?
Let France and the UK protect their own damned tankers. Why do we have to be the world's policemen?
Her contributions had a direct influence on how programming languages evolved.
Hopper practically invented programming languages. Before her, all programming was done in machine code.