You're getting food calories and scientific calories confused. When people talk about food calories, it's actually kilocalories. The generally accepted value is that 3500 food calories equates to a pound, so it's about 7700 food calories burned to lose 1kg of weight.
Body temperature is 37 degrees C. If you drink nearly frozen water (2 degrees), you can raise the temperature of water by 35 degrees.
You're supposed to drink 2 litres of water per day anyway, so just make sure it's ice cold. That's 70 calories per day, just for drinking what you're supposed to! (And if you cut out other caloric beverages, so much the better.)
70 calories may seem like small change, but consistency is the key. With this method, you'll burn 25,550 calories in a year, and find yourself 3.31kg (7.3 pounds lighter.) Not so bad for drinking water!
If you drink cold water for 5 years while your doppelgänger drinks warm, you'll find he's a chubby 16kg (or 36 pounds) heavier than you.
I know I'm coming in late to this discussion, but I'm trying to wrap my head around how they could accidentally have a leap day in 1704 and 1708. Did they not get the memo distributed to the calendar manufacturers in time? Or did they just wake up with a terrible hangover on March 1st and say, "Oh God, please tell me we didn't do it again."
The article mentions a Google employee who uses a traditional office product while commuting, and then gets into the office and (ironically) switches to the Google product. So how does he merge the changes he made while on the road with the changes others may have made in the office? That would be a great feature to have built in for a product with such a strong collaboration focus, but I don't think they have it.
I think it's funny that this article is under the Hardware section. Maybe we could get Tom's Hardware to produce a 25-page full benchmark test of this nuclear explosion v. competing nuclear tests, and then we'll really get to the bottom of this.
If they moved their site to univeraltube.com, and quickly turned utube.com into a video sharing site with Google ads, they could end up very well off. The only question would be, would google buy utube.com or sue them?
I wasn't trolling, believe it or not. This game strikes me as basically a money factory. Rather than offering a game to buy, they try to create a culture in which people will keep buying add-ons over and over again. The focus seems to be on creating hype and desire, rather than crafting a quality game.
I didn't say I object to geek-centered material here. I was just pointing out that geeks are very susceptible to seeing something as being collectible, and then spending irrational quantities of money to have that thing. So they're playing to the geek weakness. Your examples of Hallmark figurines and Christmas Village models are good examples of how non-geeks can buy into this sort of hype as well. The coffee example doesn't work so well since it's a consumable, so of course it needs to be purchased repeatedly.
So, basically you can start with a crappy version for free, but if you get hooked you end up spending up the wazoo for "collectibles?" Someone must be giddy right now that they pulled off the free slashvertisement.
There are only two groups who fall for this sort of scam: kids (think Pokemon) and geeks.
Clients are often obnoxious, and lawyers are often slimy, but the real problem is in the legal system which allows too many lawsuits to succeed.
Capitalism is based on the assumption that people are basically greedy (not necessarily in a bad way.) Given the opportunity, most people will find a way to make some money. Our laws regarding personal lawsuits lack a healthy skepticism towards those demanding money when they have faced no direct financial loss. Sometimes, accidents happen, and it's not really anyone's fault. Sometimes people are mean, but that shouldn't give others the legal right to extract money from them.
The laws are failing us. It is very difficult to codify common sense, but I'm sure we could do much better than where we find ourselves today.
1. How do I easily upload and organize all my locally saved Word and Excel files? 2. How do I maintain a local copy of all my changes and new files? 3. How safe should I feel about uploading files with sensitive personal info?
Answer these questions, Google, and I'm on board. And, I suspect many other people will be too.
I can't believe three people decided to analyze the accuracy of my Shaq analogy. (Ok, it's slashdot, I guess I can.) I meant it to be funny, not scientific. But my basic point still holds, that while the satellite is closer to the black hole than Earth, I suspect that the difference in distance is barely significant.
This is more like wearing a pair of dark sunglasses, and asking someone without sunglasses to describe the colors.
Now that makes a lot of sense. The advantage is not in being closer to the black hole, but in having a less filtered view of it. The story submitter should have said this, but instead he said that the satellite will "collect data and observations at a distance nearer to a black hole than we've ever been." I thought that was a silly thing to say, which is what prompted my analogy.
How much closer to the black hole can this satellite really be? Isn't this a bit like asking Shaq to describe the moon to us because when he stands up, he's a foot closer?
... I shudder at how many scientific fields probably have obvious solutions that aren't being found because only a small cadre of people have been exposed to the problem. I also shudder at people who artificially set up barriers to understanding their own fields...
I think you're locked into a certain way of thinking, and you are failing to see the obvious solution. This constant shuddering you are experiencing is most likely a medical condition unrelated to trends in science. Please see a doctor.
I'm gonna have to disagree with you on ST:TMP(1). I find it agonizingly slow, and this is coming from someone who enjoys 2001:ASO. I think ST:TMP is a perfect example of a movie which does not hold up, because it's so enamored with its special effects that it shows them for far too long, and now they're not anything special. I do like the concept of the movie and I think the story has a certain timeless quality to it, but the execution negates it.
It's not vaporware. It's just that in addition to not being able to save, print, or log the messages, it's also impossible to remember any part of the conversation. Unfortunately, this means people walk away from the demo thinking they've seen nothing.
"A Bell spokesman says the development of the transistor is indeed a "breakthrough" because it shows how real-world electronic circuity can be made with germanium. I wonder, though, how many more breakthroughs we will be reading about before personal computing becomes ubiquitous.'"
The real breakthroughs do not have any direct, short-term effect on our lives. Instead, they happen in a theoretical setting and they eventually lead to giant shifts in real world technology. Apple moving to a 60GB iPod which is slighty smaller is not a breakthrough. But a practical way to build optical circuitry? That sounds like one of the few times the word truly should be applied.
The core gaming group is more like 14-22 years old, from the time they have actual money to the time they get out of college. (Some will continue for a bit after college, but there's going to be a rapid fall-off.)
The other big group is parents, buying games for their 6-16 year old kids.
Slashdot Mirror
You're getting food calories and scientific calories confused. When people talk about food calories, it's actually kilocalories. The generally accepted value is that 3500 food calories equates to a pound, so it's about 7700 food calories burned to lose 1kg of weight.
Body temperature is 37 degrees C. If you drink nearly frozen water (2 degrees), you can raise the temperature of water by 35 degrees.
You're supposed to drink 2 litres of water per day anyway, so just make sure it's ice cold. That's 70 calories per day, just for drinking what you're supposed to! (And if you cut out other caloric beverages, so much the better.)
70 calories may seem like small change, but consistency is the key. With this method, you'll burn 25,550 calories in a year, and find yourself 3.31kg (7.3 pounds lighter.) Not so bad for drinking water!
If you drink cold water for 5 years while your doppelgänger drinks warm, you'll find he's a chubby 16kg (or 36 pounds) heavier than you.
HUMANS: Disregard article. Not equals true.
ZOMBIES: Protocol Co08Suy6r45: Attack 216.239.122.200
I've never seen a video more in need of circus music.
I know I'm coming in late to this discussion, but I'm trying to wrap my head around how they could accidentally have a leap day in 1704 and 1708. Did they not get the memo distributed to the calendar manufacturers in time? Or did they just wake up with a terrible hangover on March 1st and say, "Oh God, please tell me we didn't do it again."
The article mentions a Google employee who uses a traditional office product while commuting, and then gets into the office and (ironically) switches to the Google product. So how does he merge the changes he made while on the road with the changes others may have made in the office? That would be a great feature to have built in for a product with such a strong collaboration focus, but I don't think they have it.
I think it's funny that this article is under the Hardware section. Maybe we could get Tom's Hardware to produce a 25-page full benchmark test of this nuclear explosion v. competing nuclear tests, and then we'll really get to the bottom of this.
If they moved their site to univeraltube.com, and quickly turned utube.com into a video sharing site with Google ads, they could end up very well off. The only question would be, would google buy utube.com or sue them?
I wasn't trolling, believe it or not. This game strikes me as basically a money factory. Rather than offering a game to buy, they try to create a culture in which people will keep buying add-ons over and over again. The focus seems to be on creating hype and desire, rather than crafting a quality game.
I didn't say I object to geek-centered material here. I was just pointing out that geeks are very susceptible to seeing something as being collectible, and then spending irrational quantities of money to have that thing. So they're playing to the geek weakness. Your examples of Hallmark figurines and Christmas Village models are good examples of how non-geeks can buy into this sort of hype as well. The coffee example doesn't work so well since it's a consumable, so of course it needs to be purchased repeatedly.
So, basically you can start with a crappy version for free, but if you get hooked you end up spending up the wazoo for "collectibles?" Someone must be giddy right now that they pulled off the free slashvertisement.
There are only two groups who fall for this sort of scam: kids (think Pokemon) and geeks.
Clients are often obnoxious, and lawyers are often slimy, but the real problem is in the legal system which allows too many lawsuits to succeed.
Capitalism is based on the assumption that people are basically greedy (not necessarily in a bad way.) Given the opportunity, most people will find a way to make some money. Our laws regarding personal lawsuits lack a healthy skepticism towards those demanding money when they have faced no direct financial loss. Sometimes, accidents happen, and it's not really anyone's fault. Sometimes people are mean, but that shouldn't give others the legal right to extract money from them.
The laws are failing us. It is very difficult to codify common sense, but I'm sure we could do much better than where we find ourselves today.
My big 3 questions:
1. How do I easily upload and organize all my locally saved Word and Excel files?
2. How do I maintain a local copy of all my changes and new files?
3. How safe should I feel about uploading files with sensitive personal info?
Answer these questions, Google, and I'm on board. And, I suspect many other people will be too.
Or:
Won't the sharks get headaches, with these giant frickin TVs on their heads?
Or:
Is the shark included? Can I use my existing shark?
Or:
They'll make a profit, until they start getting sued by people who get too close to the TV and lose a limb.
Or:
My new laser TV looks great, except that the fin moving back and forth across the top 24 times per second is really distracting.
essential
42
Now that makes a lot of sense. The advantage is not in being closer to the black hole, but in having a less filtered view of it. The story submitter should have said this, but instead he said that the satellite will "collect data and observations at a distance nearer to a black hole than we've ever been." I thought that was a silly thing to say, which is what prompted my analogy.
How much closer to the black hole can this satellite really be? Isn't this a bit like asking Shaq to describe the moon to us because when he stands up, he's a foot closer?
I think you're locked into a certain way of thinking, and you are failing to see the obvious solution. This constant shuddering you are experiencing is most likely a medical condition unrelated to trends in science. Please see a doctor.
Wii will wiialize millions of wii! Wiially wii will!
Super High Resolution View
Wow, you sure know your Trek.
I'm gonna have to disagree with you on ST:TMP(1). I find it agonizingly slow, and this is coming from someone who enjoys 2001:ASO. I think ST:TMP is a perfect example of a movie which does not hold up, because it's so enamored with its special effects that it shows them for far too long, and now they're not anything special. I do like the concept of the movie and I think the story has a certain timeless quality to it, but the execution negates it.
Hey, man, don't take it lightly. A pirated software killed my uncle.
Oh, please. This has nothing to do with technology, and everything to do with expanding their user base and their foothold in the online video market.
In my apartment it's only intermittently 12:00. Like right... now! Not now! Now! Not now!
It's not vaporware. It's just that in addition to not being able to save, print, or log the messages, it's also impossible to remember any part of the conversation. Unfortunately, this means people walk away from the demo thinking they've seen nothing.
Imagine it is 1947...
"A Bell spokesman says the development of the transistor is indeed a "breakthrough" because it shows how real-world electronic circuity can be made with germanium. I wonder, though, how many more breakthroughs we will be reading about before personal computing becomes ubiquitous.'"
The real breakthroughs do not have any direct, short-term effect on our lives. Instead, they happen in a theoretical setting and they eventually lead to giant shifts in real world technology. Apple moving to a 60GB iPod which is slighty smaller is not a breakthrough. But a practical way to build optical circuitry? That sounds like one of the few times the word truly should be applied.
The core gaming group is more like 14-22 years old, from the time they have actual money to the time they get out of college. (Some will continue for a bit after college, but there's going to be a rapid fall-off.)
The other big group is parents, buying games for their 6-16 year old kids.