The whole point of using Imperial units is that we don't want to throw out trillions of dollars worth of infrastructure to make the Europeans happy. Seriously, spend a year in the US with our measures and spend a year somewhere that uses metric measures; metric isn't any easier for any thing you're likely to be doing on a day to day basis. Unless of course you're a scientist or engineer.
The obesity rate in the US is over 25% and I think in some places over 30%. Chronic diseases are not that common.
And yes, I have had to deal with numerous chronic illnesses over the years. I've had digestive problems for years, I nearly starved to death due to a bacterial infection of the stomach. I had a heat stroke and ultra-low sodium levels. Not to mention chronic sleep problems and other brain injury. But, the only times when I feel like crap, it's because I'm not getting appropriate exercise and my diet is crap. You might not notice it now, but if you clean up the diet and get the exercise you can get, you'll see an improvement. Sure that exercise might just be short periods of walking or pedals under the desk while you sit, but any exercise helps.
You might not be able to do rigorous exercise, but even just walking around the block a couple times a day does wonders. Cutting out the crap from your diet as in pretty much any carbohydrate that doesn't come from a vegetable helps a lot.
The reason why I'm on my high horse is because all this bullshit about people not being able to exercise is usually just that bullshit. I'm sure that there are a few people that are genuinely bedridden or can't exercise, but those people are rare and usually the result of not bothering to take care of themselves in the first place. Cancer is markedly less common in people that take care of themselves, yes, people who take care of themselves can get cancer, but it's much less common. Digestive problems are often the result of eating poisonous foods like dairy and wheat.
Bullshit. Sounds like your employer is violating your rights then. If you're working 11 hours a shift, then you're entitled to at least 2 meal periods. Not to mention several breaks. And apart from the time when you're eating, you shouldn't be sitting through those breaks.
Sure, it's not as good as 30 minutes of continuous activity, but it's a hell of a lot better than just becoming a fatty.
The difference is that the people saying them believe that the 2nd amendment guarantees them the right to buy firearms without a background check, for weapons with unlimited capacity and firing rate. That the US constitution does not require equal rights for homosexuals and that the 4th amendment doesn't apply when the FBI says terrorism. And so forth, things that are clearly contradicted by previous precedents and even the words of the constitution themselves..
Just because the other side makes a similar claim, does not mean that they're correct. It just means that they're capable of saying it. And given how far right of center they are, nobody should be taking the things they claim to be particularly serious. The "liberals" at least try to protect the oppositions rights from time to time. Whereas the right is based upon the presumption that they can force their religious ideology on everybody else.
Because including 5 names would have been overkill. Scalia and Thomas are the most egregious example, and Roberts as the chief justice sets the general tone for the court.
They do that in Alabama, IIRC, and as a result their constitution is over 6000 pages. The constitution was never intended to be subjected to countless amendments. The framers of the constitution clearly intended for the document to be interpreted based upon the current circumstances, rather than what we think somebody might have intended hundreds of years ago.
The constitution is intended to be relatively lean so that people don't go hunting for loopholes and the SCOTUS has the flexibility to make minor course adjustments in interpretation as needed. Having to have a constitutional amendment to specifically state that the 14th amendment applies to blacks and homosexuals as well is rather ridiculous.
The constitution is also supposed to be something that the average citizen can roughly understand. We might not understand the minutia, but we can generally understand that the police can't barge into our house for no good reason and ransack the place looking for evidence. And we can understand that the government can't restrict our ability to criticize the government.
No, they don't. I'm not sure where you got the idea that they stick to it. For example health care is an interstate commerce problem and as such the Federal Government has jurisdiction over that. Sick people are permitted to move from state to state for better coverage if they choose and medical supplies regularly get shipped interstate as well. But the court ruled that it wasn't an interstate commerce issue and as such gutted the power of the Federal Government to regulate interstate commerce.
And yes, the constitution is a living document. It was never intended to be interpreted literally, it is a guiding document to establish the basics of what the government can and cannot do. Remember it was primarily the conservative justices that ruled that Bush won the 2000 election, despite the constitution clearly stating what happens when there's a tie. And it was the conservatives that time and time again ruled against the 4th amendment.
To suggest that the "literal" interpretations that they're going for are in keeping with the words on the page, requires a certain amount of ignorance as to the words on the page. If we're going to be going completely liberal, then why can't I have anthrax, IEDs or a tactical nuke? I mean the 2nd amendment doesn't specifically state firearms, so I should have the right to arm myself with anything I like. Even the conservatives on the court acknowledge that the 2nd amendment doesn't permit private ownership of nuclear and biological weapons.
Revolution isn't the answer. The answer is to stop voting for candidates that are promising to destroy the government and fail to even pretend to have plans to improve the situation. Ultimately, unless Grover Norquist is tried for sedition, along with the various GOP candidates that signed his fealty pledge, there's going to be no particular legitimacy for a large number of legislators.
Supreme Court Justices don't have to recuse themselves. They should, but the normal rules that govern other judges don't apply. Ultimately for better or for worse, they're appointed for life, so until they die or resign, there's basically nothing that can be done about them.
Which is why douches like Roberts, Scalia and Thomas are such a problem, none of them have any particularly firm commitment to the rule of law, only to continuing their ideologies, regardless of constitutionality.
Then don't vote for politicians that are for securing the country at all cost. Honestly, if the GOP candidates wouldn't be so quick to take away our freedoms, it would be a lot easier to find somebody to vote for that would have more of a spine. But, ultimately, we ended up with Obama who was far less scary than either Romney or McCain in this area, but falls well short of what a reasonable politician should be doing with personal Liberties.
Yeah, that's the thing, you don't need John Q. Public to know the identity of the people posting, at most the moderators need that information. And even then, what you really need is a snail main address as there are probably dozens of H. Edwardses out there. Or John Smith, Jack Johnson, etc.
I disagree, the fringe folks that need protection often times post and publish anonymously. Unfortunately, there's no way of deciding who should and shouldn't be permitted that freedom without shutting some that need the protection.
In Nazi Germany it was a potentially fatal mistake to publish materials that questioned Hitler's motives and intent. In the US, you could wind up losing everything you had if you wound up on the Blacklist during the Red Scare.
Except that this pill won't bring the benefits of exercise. Sure, it might be useful for people that genuinely can't exercise, but exercise affects damn near the whole body in one way or another. For instance, one way of increasing the amount of tryptophan in the brain available for creating seratonin and melatonin is exercise. Tryptophan has a tough time getting into the brain due to the blood brain barrier otherwise.
And a pill that would address that would be potentially very dangerous. There's a reason why the barrier exists there, and breaching it on purpose is something that should only be done with great care.
Or you just spend the moderate effort it takes to get enough sleep, cut the carbohydrates down to a reasonable level, and spend a few hours a week walking.
DNA has very, very little to do with it. Yes, our genome does play a role in it, but our DNA is not programmed to make some people fat asses and other people bean poles, as neither state is one that would result in a long secure life. Our DNA evolved to handle periods of famine and feast. If you're constantly eating, then the body doesn't actually get a chance to recognize the difference between hunger and craving. And if you're eating excessive quantities of carbohydrates your blood sugar is going to be spiking regularly, making you tired until you get another hit.
If you're cramming poisonous substances like grains and dairy down your throat at every opportunity, of course you're going to be lethargic and fat. It's not your body's fault that you're not fueling it properly. When I stopped eating dairy and wheat because I didn't have them available, I lost about 20 or so pounds within the first month or two, and I didn't gain those pounds back until I started eating dairy and wheat again. I was doing some exercise, but less during the period where I lost the weight and more when I gained it back. And I felt great.
Ultimately, people who choose to blame others or their genes will never lose the weight because they aren't going to be making any changes that might work. The brain can make you fat if you decide that it's inevitable, trick you into overeating and underexercising and generally turn you into a blob of lard.
No, it's not. Instead of watching that 4th hour of television every night, spend a half hour or so and walk around the block a few times. Cut out all the dairy and wheat products and there you've probably avoided most of the crap that the pill is supposed to cure.
I literally lost 25 pounds walking a half hour a day and cutting out the dairy, wheat and a lot of the superfluous carbs. At no point did I feel sick, tired or particularly hungry, in fact I felt and looked better than I had in years as my digestive track went back to a healthier state and my blood wasn't full of the crap that's in the usual American diet.
It doesn't take that much work to eat and live healthily, it just requires some commitment to your heatlh and a willingness to give your body the kind of foods and exercise that it evolved dealing with. You don't need to eat just because it's dinner time, you eat when your body gets hungry, and I mean hungry, not just a craving to eat.
That's not fair, that's a post hoc justification for it. The research is what's supposed to get you the job, not the journal that your publishing in. If a college is interested in hiring you, they're going to review the articles anyways. Failing to do so is just plain negligent.
Sure, it might be a useful filter, but it's not the journal that dictates the quality of the research, it's the research. Institutions that just look at that are liable to wind up hiring up a frauds before too long as the people caught committing academic fraud usually have signs in their research.
Pretty much, the quality of everything from the +5 posts to the troll posts used to be a lot higher a decade ago. Now, even the trolls lack imagination and much of the "insightful" posting is just parroting whatever group think is en vogue at the moment.
I get that it's cool to hate the educational establishment and all, but if you're choosing between 20 freshly minted CS master degree holders and 20 hardcore coders, you're not qualified to be hiring anybody. Most likely a mixing of people with education and work experience is going to yield optimal results, not choosing to hire only people with one sort of experience. Especially, if you're wanting to create a product that hasn't been done to death.
There's a shitload of crap code out there written by "hardcore coders", none of which is an example to be emulated. Sure, the masters degree holders might not have experience, but they also don't have much experience writing crappy code. Which, from the comments I see around here from "professional programmers", could very easily justify not hiring people that have decades of wrong experience to retrain.
Only if it's original research. A typical PhD program requires that you advance the field, whereas a masters program will permit you to conduct research that's just investigating things that have been investigated and synthesizing other people's research into new papers.
If it's free that's one thing, otherwise it means that you've taken money from 80% of the students that enrolled and probably not given them anything of value.
The number of students that complete the course work is most certainly one of the aspects that should be assessed when judging a program. Having 4 burn out for every 1 that completes does not speak well to the design of the course. A course should permit most of the students to complete, assuming they put in the effort and master the material.
Neither time nor money is unlimited and in both cases wasting it isn't justifiable just because it's widely known that the program wastes the resources of 80% of the people who enroll.
That information is presumably already spoiled and the Russians don't really care about him causing any more trouble. The only reason for that particular requirement is so they can pretend to be sympathetic. Truth be told, I'm pretty sure that the Kremlin is tickled pink about all the information that's been released as it makes them look better by comparison. I'm also positive that they're very much aware of how much danger Snowden is in from assassination attempts. The only way the insurance file is going to be spread around and decrypted is if the US does something to trigger it.
Slashdot Mirror
The whole point of using Imperial units is that we don't want to throw out trillions of dollars worth of infrastructure to make the Europeans happy. Seriously, spend a year in the US with our measures and spend a year somewhere that uses metric measures; metric isn't any easier for any thing you're likely to be doing on a day to day basis. Unless of course you're a scientist or engineer.
The obesity rate in the US is over 25% and I think in some places over 30%. Chronic diseases are not that common.
And yes, I have had to deal with numerous chronic illnesses over the years. I've had digestive problems for years, I nearly starved to death due to a bacterial infection of the stomach. I had a heat stroke and ultra-low sodium levels. Not to mention chronic sleep problems and other brain injury. But, the only times when I feel like crap, it's because I'm not getting appropriate exercise and my diet is crap. You might not notice it now, but if you clean up the diet and get the exercise you can get, you'll see an improvement. Sure that exercise might just be short periods of walking or pedals under the desk while you sit, but any exercise helps.
You might not be able to do rigorous exercise, but even just walking around the block a couple times a day does wonders. Cutting out the crap from your diet as in pretty much any carbohydrate that doesn't come from a vegetable helps a lot.
The reason why I'm on my high horse is because all this bullshit about people not being able to exercise is usually just that bullshit. I'm sure that there are a few people that are genuinely bedridden or can't exercise, but those people are rare and usually the result of not bothering to take care of themselves in the first place. Cancer is markedly less common in people that take care of themselves, yes, people who take care of themselves can get cancer, but it's much less common. Digestive problems are often the result of eating poisonous foods like dairy and wheat.
Bullshit. Sounds like your employer is violating your rights then. If you're working 11 hours a shift, then you're entitled to at least 2 meal periods. Not to mention several breaks. And apart from the time when you're eating, you shouldn't be sitting through those breaks.
Sure, it's not as good as 30 minutes of continuous activity, but it's a hell of a lot better than just becoming a fatty.
The difference is that the people saying them believe that the 2nd amendment guarantees them the right to buy firearms without a background check, for weapons with unlimited capacity and firing rate. That the US constitution does not require equal rights for homosexuals and that the 4th amendment doesn't apply when the FBI says terrorism. And so forth, things that are clearly contradicted by previous precedents and even the words of the constitution themselves..
Just because the other side makes a similar claim, does not mean that they're correct. It just means that they're capable of saying it. And given how far right of center they are, nobody should be taking the things they claim to be particularly serious. The "liberals" at least try to protect the oppositions rights from time to time. Whereas the right is based upon the presumption that they can force their religious ideology on everybody else.
Because including 5 names would have been overkill. Scalia and Thomas are the most egregious example, and Roberts as the chief justice sets the general tone for the court.
They do that in Alabama, IIRC, and as a result their constitution is over 6000 pages. The constitution was never intended to be subjected to countless amendments. The framers of the constitution clearly intended for the document to be interpreted based upon the current circumstances, rather than what we think somebody might have intended hundreds of years ago.
The constitution is intended to be relatively lean so that people don't go hunting for loopholes and the SCOTUS has the flexibility to make minor course adjustments in interpretation as needed. Having to have a constitutional amendment to specifically state that the 14th amendment applies to blacks and homosexuals as well is rather ridiculous.
The constitution is also supposed to be something that the average citizen can roughly understand. We might not understand the minutia, but we can generally understand that the police can't barge into our house for no good reason and ransack the place looking for evidence. And we can understand that the government can't restrict our ability to criticize the government.
No, they don't. I'm not sure where you got the idea that they stick to it. For example health care is an interstate commerce problem and as such the Federal Government has jurisdiction over that. Sick people are permitted to move from state to state for better coverage if they choose and medical supplies regularly get shipped interstate as well. But the court ruled that it wasn't an interstate commerce issue and as such gutted the power of the Federal Government to regulate interstate commerce.
And yes, the constitution is a living document. It was never intended to be interpreted literally, it is a guiding document to establish the basics of what the government can and cannot do. Remember it was primarily the conservative justices that ruled that Bush won the 2000 election, despite the constitution clearly stating what happens when there's a tie. And it was the conservatives that time and time again ruled against the 4th amendment.
To suggest that the "literal" interpretations that they're going for are in keeping with the words on the page, requires a certain amount of ignorance as to the words on the page. If we're going to be going completely liberal, then why can't I have anthrax, IEDs or a tactical nuke? I mean the 2nd amendment doesn't specifically state firearms, so I should have the right to arm myself with anything I like. Even the conservatives on the court acknowledge that the 2nd amendment doesn't permit private ownership of nuclear and biological weapons.
Revolution isn't the answer. The answer is to stop voting for candidates that are promising to destroy the government and fail to even pretend to have plans to improve the situation. Ultimately, unless Grover Norquist is tried for sedition, along with the various GOP candidates that signed his fealty pledge, there's going to be no particular legitimacy for a large number of legislators.
Supreme Court Justices don't have to recuse themselves. They should, but the normal rules that govern other judges don't apply. Ultimately for better or for worse, they're appointed for life, so until they die or resign, there's basically nothing that can be done about them.
Which is why douches like Roberts, Scalia and Thomas are such a problem, none of them have any particularly firm commitment to the rule of law, only to continuing their ideologies, regardless of constitutionality.
Then don't vote for politicians that are for securing the country at all cost. Honestly, if the GOP candidates wouldn't be so quick to take away our freedoms, it would be a lot easier to find somebody to vote for that would have more of a spine. But, ultimately, we ended up with Obama who was far less scary than either Romney or McCain in this area, but falls well short of what a reasonable politician should be doing with personal Liberties.
Yeah, that's the thing, you don't need John Q. Public to know the identity of the people posting, at most the moderators need that information. And even then, what you really need is a snail main address as there are probably dozens of H. Edwardses out there. Or John Smith, Jack Johnson, etc.
I disagree, the fringe folks that need protection often times post and publish anonymously. Unfortunately, there's no way of deciding who should and shouldn't be permitted that freedom without shutting some that need the protection.
In Nazi Germany it was a potentially fatal mistake to publish materials that questioned Hitler's motives and intent. In the US, you could wind up losing everything you had if you wound up on the Blacklist during the Red Scare.
But it has the electrolytes that humans crave.
Except that this pill won't bring the benefits of exercise. Sure, it might be useful for people that genuinely can't exercise, but exercise affects damn near the whole body in one way or another. For instance, one way of increasing the amount of tryptophan in the brain available for creating seratonin and melatonin is exercise. Tryptophan has a tough time getting into the brain due to the blood brain barrier otherwise.
And a pill that would address that would be potentially very dangerous. There's a reason why the barrier exists there, and breaching it on purpose is something that should only be done with great care.
Or you just spend the moderate effort it takes to get enough sleep, cut the carbohydrates down to a reasonable level, and spend a few hours a week walking.
DNA has very, very little to do with it. Yes, our genome does play a role in it, but our DNA is not programmed to make some people fat asses and other people bean poles, as neither state is one that would result in a long secure life. Our DNA evolved to handle periods of famine and feast. If you're constantly eating, then the body doesn't actually get a chance to recognize the difference between hunger and craving. And if you're eating excessive quantities of carbohydrates your blood sugar is going to be spiking regularly, making you tired until you get another hit.
If you're cramming poisonous substances like grains and dairy down your throat at every opportunity, of course you're going to be lethargic and fat. It's not your body's fault that you're not fueling it properly. When I stopped eating dairy and wheat because I didn't have them available, I lost about 20 or so pounds within the first month or two, and I didn't gain those pounds back until I started eating dairy and wheat again. I was doing some exercise, but less during the period where I lost the weight and more when I gained it back. And I felt great.
Ultimately, people who choose to blame others or their genes will never lose the weight because they aren't going to be making any changes that might work. The brain can make you fat if you decide that it's inevitable, trick you into overeating and underexercising and generally turn you into a blob of lard.
No, it's not. Instead of watching that 4th hour of television every night, spend a half hour or so and walk around the block a few times. Cut out all the dairy and wheat products and there you've probably avoided most of the crap that the pill is supposed to cure.
I literally lost 25 pounds walking a half hour a day and cutting out the dairy, wheat and a lot of the superfluous carbs. At no point did I feel sick, tired or particularly hungry, in fact I felt and looked better than I had in years as my digestive track went back to a healthier state and my blood wasn't full of the crap that's in the usual American diet.
It doesn't take that much work to eat and live healthily, it just requires some commitment to your heatlh and a willingness to give your body the kind of foods and exercise that it evolved dealing with. You don't need to eat just because it's dinner time, you eat when your body gets hungry, and I mean hungry, not just a craving to eat.
That's not fair, that's a post hoc justification for it. The research is what's supposed to get you the job, not the journal that your publishing in. If a college is interested in hiring you, they're going to review the articles anyways. Failing to do so is just plain negligent.
Sure, it might be a useful filter, but it's not the journal that dictates the quality of the research, it's the research. Institutions that just look at that are liable to wind up hiring up a frauds before too long as the people caught committing academic fraud usually have signs in their research.
Pretty much, the quality of everything from the +5 posts to the troll posts used to be a lot higher a decade ago. Now, even the trolls lack imagination and much of the "insightful" posting is just parroting whatever group think is en vogue at the moment.
I get that it's cool to hate the educational establishment and all, but if you're choosing between 20 freshly minted CS master degree holders and 20 hardcore coders, you're not qualified to be hiring anybody. Most likely a mixing of people with education and work experience is going to yield optimal results, not choosing to hire only people with one sort of experience. Especially, if you're wanting to create a product that hasn't been done to death.
There's a shitload of crap code out there written by "hardcore coders", none of which is an example to be emulated. Sure, the masters degree holders might not have experience, but they also don't have much experience writing crappy code. Which, from the comments I see around here from "professional programmers", could very easily justify not hiring people that have decades of wrong experience to retrain.
$100k? Mine was a quarter of that including all relevant expenses. Even if you consider the typical interest on that, it's still well below $100k.
Only if it's original research. A typical PhD program requires that you advance the field, whereas a masters program will permit you to conduct research that's just investigating things that have been investigated and synthesizing other people's research into new papers.
If it's free that's one thing, otherwise it means that you've taken money from 80% of the students that enrolled and probably not given them anything of value.
The number of students that complete the course work is most certainly one of the aspects that should be assessed when judging a program. Having 4 burn out for every 1 that completes does not speak well to the design of the course. A course should permit most of the students to complete, assuming they put in the effort and master the material.
Neither time nor money is unlimited and in both cases wasting it isn't justifiable just because it's widely known that the program wastes the resources of 80% of the people who enroll.
Jokes on you, the encrypted it using ROT13.
That information is presumably already spoiled and the Russians don't really care about him causing any more trouble. The only reason for that particular requirement is so they can pretend to be sympathetic. Truth be told, I'm pretty sure that the Kremlin is tickled pink about all the information that's been released as it makes them look better by comparison.
I'm also positive that they're very much aware of how much danger Snowden is in from assassination attempts. The only way the insurance file is going to be spread around and decrypted is if the US does something to trigger it.
LOL, Murdoc and MacGyver? Shouldn't he be trying to kill you by now?