What's not credible? Did you watch the video? He's not claiming sugar kills you. He actually says glucose is extremely safe. He does however suggest a definition by which fructose (not glucose) can be defined as toxic as alcohol.
Re:This is not the logic you are looking for
on
Is Sugar Toxic?
·
· Score: 1
The whole point of the video is that there no such things as "sugar" to which you can apply assumptions such as the one you just stated. Glucose and Fructose are fundamentally different and that's what this guy is trying to explain.
Re:This is not the logic you are looking for
on
Is Sugar Toxic?
·
· Score: 1
Watch the video, he's not calling sugar toxic. In fact he argues that you can overeat on glucose all you want and it won't do you any harm. He's specifically targeting non-natural fructose, incl. HFCS.
Re:Yes, it's toxic...
on
Is Sugar Toxic?
·
· Score: 3, Informative
You should watch the video. It's not a claim, it's not a diet and it doesn't pretend to have a simple solution.
In the hospital where I used to work this guy, head of a division or not, would be reprimanded (if not worse) for trying to pull this stunt.
If you want to take something up the chain, it's a request for a caldav server. Not a "hack" to allow your own little pet project to jeopardize security. I assume you want others to use this system as well? Who will train them? Who will maintain the service after you leave? Who will fix this server when you're on leave? Who wil be held responsible when your server gets hacked? Did you actually think any of this through?
You obviously have no idea what creativity (or art) means. Most artists don't make a dime even with IP law. They still produce though, and many of their works are stunning. Sure, their lifes may not be easy, but who's is these days. It doesn't have to be easy.
The problem here is not the survival of creativity, which I guarantee you is not at risk. It's your notion that Britney Spears is somehow creative or needs to make anything more than strippers salary.
You missed the point. The ridiculousness didn't start when these people applied for religious status. It started when big corporations decided to financially cripple minors for downloading a handful of songs. We tried fighting the fire with water, now it's time to fight fire with fire.
You just need higher-tech. The Chinese aren't making airplanes yet, at least not comparable to the US or France. German cars are still produced in western countries, at least to serve the local market. Hell, if I go to Subway in China, pretty much all of the baking and toasting gear they use is imported from the US. Of course this all just a matter of time. There are things for which they are not ready yet, and this is the key.
The problem is not that jobs disappear, it's that new ones don't get created fast enough. We have slowed down innovation, often artificially (think RIAA, patents, etc.), and it's biting us in the ass. While we often (rightfully) criticize China for their copycat products, Tudou (their Youtube) was launched before Youtube. Tencent (their social network mammoth) was highly profitable before anyone had ever heard of Myspace, let alone Facebook. The Chinese still play catchup in most areas, but they are closing in and will take the lead in more and more areas if we let them.
We should stop whining about manufacturing jobs and get our ass back in the saddle. We either innovate and take back the lead in job creation, or settle for leftover jobs they'll start sending us if we don't get our act together.
You highly overestimate the importance of low Chinese wages. In most products these wages form only a tiny fraction of total cost. Not to mention that China is in fact expensive when compared to other developing economies. To replace the Chinese wages with American ones would not increase prices that much.
So why still produce in China? Because the Chinese government knows what it takes to make things attractive for manufacturing. Infrastructure, tax breaks, economic zones, environmental regulations, availability of energy and raw materials, managing a gigantic pool of laborers, etc. In places like Guangdong, Chengdu, etc. where production takes place, *everything and everyone* is geared towards production.
I'm sure you understand you don't create a second silicon valley by asking IBM, Cisco and Microsoft to move next to a university in Florida. It's not that simple. Likewise you don't create an attractive climate for manufacturing by supplying cheap labor and telling Apple to move it's factory to the US. You'll need to do a lot more than that.
It's a feature, but not enforceable. In fact there are content providers and users that already run dual-stack. They are enjoying the scenario you mention. The majority of providers however seems to wait until the last minute. This means they'll have more users than they have IPv4 addresses, hence these users cannot run dual-stack.
Most Asian operators I'm aware off use the 10.x.x.x range and NAT this one or more times. Would be interested to know which operator is responsible for this higher-than-expected usage.
Mind you that China does not mistreat everyone equally. Chinese committing a crime against foreigners on Chinese soil are punished more severely than Chinese committing crimes against Chinese. Also, China frequently deports and temporarily bans foreigners who commit a crime instead of jailing them as they would Chinese. (Not that this is any better than equal mistreatment.)
China has a ballot box. There are elections all the time. Granted, all choices come from the same party, but that's still 70 million people to choose from.
Eh, I take it you don't know Ai Weiwei? The tweet may have been the trigger, but it's not the first and only time he's challenged the Chinese government. Note that I'm not defending his arrest, but to say he was "basically" arrested for a "goddamned tweet" is certainly spreading misinformation.
Indeed. In the last 5 years that I've been living in China now I hear everyone whine and complain about the government. And often with effect. The creator of the Chinese firewall was blown off of Weibo (Chinese Twitter), numerous officials have been jailed for corruption, relocation plans have been canceled, minimum wages increased etc. All after citizen protests - be they offline or online. It may not be up to our western standards just yet, but it certainly isn't the case that Chinese speaking their mind always end up in jail or that their complaints are ignored.
Of course this is not what many of us westerners want to hear. We want to read about the few hundred or so (mostly older) cases human rights organization can come up with and apply that to 1.4 billion people. It's like saying the US prosecutes every 12yo for download MP3's or some other ridiculous stuff that does occasionally happen.
China doesn't promise the theoretical freedom to run a church without registration. Registration is mandatory. Bringing this issue up weakens your otherwise reasonable point.
IMHO for most people it would be more useful to learn how to do their taxes or manage their income. What use is fluid dynamics if all the money you make ends up in the hands of the guy selling you a mortgage construction you didn't comprehend.
1. If you don't need the other features of a netbook, that's still $100 wasted. 2. Does the $100 include those 3 software packages? 3. What 1000 things are you thinking of? I really can't think of a 1000 things I would want to do on a netbook. Some things, sure. But do they justify the $100, maybe not.
Most phones allow you to turn roaming on and off, exactly for this reason. While roaming is more common when you leave a certain area it's certainly isn't (and never was) the only use case.
In our area for example there is a small provider which support multiple networks using a single sim, as a way to reduce cost and optimize reception. These sims are essentially continuously roaming.
Slashdot Mirror
Watch the video. He agrees with you and goes into detail why glucose will never ever harm you. That's NOT what this video is about.
What's not credible? Did you watch the video? He's not claiming sugar kills you. He actually says glucose is extremely safe. He does however suggest a definition by which fructose (not glucose) can be defined as toxic as alcohol.
The whole point of the video is that there no such things as "sugar" to which you can apply assumptions such as the one you just stated. Glucose and Fructose are fundamentally different and that's what this guy is trying to explain.
Watch the video, he's not calling sugar toxic. In fact he argues that you can overeat on glucose all you want and it won't do you any harm. He's specifically targeting non-natural fructose, incl. HFCS.
You should watch the video. It's not a claim, it's not a diet and it doesn't pretend to have a simple solution.
In the hospital where I used to work this guy, head of a division or not, would be reprimanded (if not worse) for trying to pull this stunt.
If you want to take something up the chain, it's a request for a caldav server. Not a "hack" to allow your own little pet project to jeopardize security. I assume you want others to use this system as well? Who will train them? Who will maintain the service after you leave? Who will fix this server when you're on leave? Who wil be held responsible when your server gets hacked? Did you actually think any of this through?
You obviously have no idea what creativity (or art) means. Most artists don't make a dime even with IP law. They still produce though, and many of their works are stunning. Sure, their lifes may not be easy, but who's is these days. It doesn't have to be easy.
The problem here is not the survival of creativity, which I guarantee you is not at risk. It's your notion that Britney Spears is somehow creative or needs to make anything more than strippers salary.
I did.
You missed the point. The ridiculousness didn't start when these people applied for religious status. It started when big corporations decided to financially cripple minors for downloading a handful of songs. We tried fighting the fire with water, now it's time to fight fire with fire.
Just remember that to most of the worlds population, you are the rich man.
You just need higher-tech. The Chinese aren't making airplanes yet, at least not comparable to the US or France. German cars are still produced in western countries, at least to serve the local market. Hell, if I go to Subway in China, pretty much all of the baking and toasting gear they use is imported from the US. Of course this all just a matter of time. There are things for which they are not ready yet, and this is the key.
The problem is not that jobs disappear, it's that new ones don't get created fast enough. We have slowed down innovation, often artificially (think RIAA, patents, etc.), and it's biting us in the ass. While we often (rightfully) criticize China for their copycat products, Tudou (their Youtube) was launched before Youtube. Tencent (their social network mammoth) was highly profitable before anyone had ever heard of Myspace, let alone Facebook. The Chinese still play catchup in most areas, but they are closing in and will take the lead in more and more areas if we let them.
We should stop whining about manufacturing jobs and get our ass back in the saddle. We either innovate and take back the lead in job creation, or settle for leftover jobs they'll start sending us if we don't get our act together.
You highly overestimate the importance of low Chinese wages. In most products these wages form only a tiny fraction of total cost. Not to mention that China is in fact expensive when compared to other developing economies. To replace the Chinese wages with American ones would not increase prices that much.
So why still produce in China? Because the Chinese government knows what it takes to make things attractive for manufacturing. Infrastructure, tax breaks, economic zones, environmental regulations, availability of energy and raw materials, managing a gigantic pool of laborers, etc. In places like Guangdong, Chengdu, etc. where production takes place, *everything and everyone* is geared towards production.
I'm sure you understand you don't create a second silicon valley by asking IBM, Cisco and Microsoft to move next to a university in Florida. It's not that simple. Likewise you don't create an attractive climate for manufacturing by supplying cheap labor and telling Apple to move it's factory to the US. You'll need to do a lot more than that.
It's a feature, but not enforceable. In fact there are content providers and users that already run dual-stack. They are enjoying the scenario you mention. The majority of providers however seems to wait until the last minute. This means they'll have more users than they have IPv4 addresses, hence these users cannot run dual-stack.
Most Asian operators I'm aware off use the 10.x.x.x range and NAT this one or more times. Would be interested to know which operator is responsible for this higher-than-expected usage.
Mind you that China does not mistreat everyone equally. Chinese committing a crime against foreigners on Chinese soil are punished more severely than Chinese committing crimes against Chinese. Also, China frequently deports and temporarily bans foreigners who commit a crime instead of jailing them as they would Chinese. (Not that this is any better than equal mistreatment.)
China has a ballot box. There are elections all the time. Granted, all choices come from the same party, but that's still 70 million people to choose from.
Please note that Cisco, an American company, is making these blocks, be it at the request of the Chinese.
Also, I checked for you just now, wikileaks.ch works just fine here in China.
Eh, I take it you don't know Ai Weiwei? The tweet may have been the trigger, but it's not the first and only time he's challenged the Chinese government. Note that I'm not defending his arrest, but to say he was "basically" arrested for a "goddamned tweet" is certainly spreading misinformation.
Sorry dude, but the US imprisons over 2 million people. China is around 1.5 million. Even in absolute numbers the US trumps China.
Indeed. In the last 5 years that I've been living in China now I hear everyone whine and complain about the government. And often with effect. The creator of the Chinese firewall was blown off of Weibo (Chinese Twitter), numerous officials have been jailed for corruption, relocation plans have been canceled, minimum wages increased etc. All after citizen protests - be they offline or online. It may not be up to our western standards just yet, but it certainly isn't the case that Chinese speaking their mind always end up in jail or that their complaints are ignored.
Of course this is not what many of us westerners want to hear. We want to read about the few hundred or so (mostly older) cases human rights organization can come up with and apply that to 1.4 billion people. It's like saying the US prosecutes every 12yo for download MP3's or some other ridiculous stuff that does occasionally happen.
China doesn't promise the theoretical freedom to run a church without registration. Registration is mandatory. Bringing this issue up weakens your otherwise reasonable point.
IMHO for most people it would be more useful to learn how to do their taxes or manage their income. What use is fluid dynamics if all the money you make ends up in the hands of the guy selling you a mortgage construction you didn't comprehend.
1. If you don't need the other features of a netbook, that's still $100 wasted.
2. Does the $100 include those 3 software packages?
3. What 1000 things are you thinking of? I really can't think of a 1000 things I would want to do on a netbook. Some things, sure. But do they justify the $100, maybe not.
More scary warnings sell better. Cigarette companies figure that out a while ago, so has big pharma.
Most phones allow you to turn roaming on and off, exactly for this reason. While roaming is more common when you leave a certain area it's certainly isn't (and never was) the only use case.
In our area for example there is a small provider which support multiple networks using a single sim, as a way to reduce cost and optimize reception. These sims are essentially continuously roaming.