It has not occurred to you that the hate directed towards Israel is a natural result of the actions the Israeli government has taken over the years? The wholesale slaughter, indeed genocide, of the Palestinian people? The high seas piracy they commit frequently with without consequence? The assassinations, the hit jobs, theft of land, war crimes, etc etc.

Don't create your anti-free speech stance entirely on your pro-Israel anti-Islam bigoted belief.

What you are proposing abridges freedom of speech. If a person decides to jump off a bridge because someone called them fat, too bad. We should have learned as a society that restrictions on actions do not make us safer unless those particular necessarily lead directly to harm of others. Advocating violence against an ethnic group, while reprehensible, should be protected speech. Shouting "Fire" in a crowded theater necessarily leads directly to the harm of others, so restrictions are acceptable.

What invariably ends up happening is government takes too much control. Just look at what's happening in England (to Tottenham's Yid Army or the ridiculously racist hit job the FA did on Luis Suarez for using the perfectly acceptable by South American standards word negrito). If you give government power, they will abuse it. Every time. The question should be: is the abuse worth it? In this case, definitely not.

And how much time was lost from (1) employees needing to learn a new system, (2) reintegrating email onto a new client platform, and (3) finding a new way to conduct patching. (Microsoft, for all their deficiencies, is better than its competitors at keeping patches up-to-date. I'm looking at you, Apple.)

I'm not saying that the move may not be correct in terms of dollars and sense, but please answer these questions before blowing sunshine up my ass.

Joe Biden is a bit of a buffoon, but that thing about firing a shotgun through a front door is taken out of context. He was referring to someone's question about hypothetical end of days where target ID rules likely aren't such a big deal.

Biden did actually advocated firing a warning shot through a window, which is illegal and presumably not during the end of days. Not very clever, Uncle Joe.

It's kind of like the Al Gore Internet stuff. I am not Al's biggest fan, but the guy never said anything about inventing the Internet. Al Gore was instrumental in getting the Federal Government to begin using the networks, particularly for check processing. He saved the taxpayers quite a bit of money by doing this. Gore was one of the first elected officials to really get what the Internet was going to do for society.

No, we're all just shocked that they sold their boys. If it was girls being sold, it would not have made the papers or attracted the attention of the Chinese cops.

Didn't Remington import for a number of years shotguns from a Russian company called Baikal? They were terrible guns for any use other than a club, poorly balanced and an action that made an I beam look flexible. But if you wanted a gun to club someone with, a Baikal was an awesome choice. It made a hellagood club - stout and durable. Thing was built like a tank.

Considering how many doctors used to inoculate for smallpox, a lot. There's probably envelopes containing spores in old collections. Hope they're dead.

Yeah. That flag pretty much no longer flies over the land of the free and the home of the brave.

Last time I went into a court house, I was required to remove my belt. Somehow, the US made it through a foreign invasion, a Civil War, WWI, WWII, the Cold War, and absolutely massive social upheaval without requiring people to remove clothing to enter into courts of law. But a few jackasses drive airplanes into some buildings and it's goodbye liberty, hello 'safety'. This 100% safe nonsense is destroying the Republic. We are less safe than ever and we have done it to ourselves. Government is the problem with our security, not to the solution to it

Yeah, that's not really true. H-1B workers routinely get paid less than their American counterparts, and once hired, seldom get raises and never talk back.

At a big corporation with dozens of lawyers on staff or retainer, the costs of bringing on an H-1B are minimal.

I actually have a freshinstall.sh that I've built that does quite a few of the things I want to happen to a clean system (add/remove software, turn services on/off, map network resources, etc.).

That's a great start, but what I haven't been able to figure out how to script things like adding and configuring applets to the panels.

Yeah, I liked that manga too.

No.

Humans poisoned the crap out of it with absolutely complete regard for the future of the species. Passenger Pigeons were regarded as a menace by early settlers, like locust. And like locust, they were eliminated. Yes, Passenger Pigeons were hunted, and yes, the last few thousand were likely killed by hunters. But the first 100,000,000 million were poisoned or had their trees cut down.

I agree.

I have been eating "low-carb/high-fat" over the last 8 months, with a focus on natural and unprocessed foods (so essentially, meat, eggs, and green veggies). This fits well with people who eat paleo. The biggest divergence is that I use butter, cheese, and dark chocolate and try to avoid the moderately carb-rich foods that paleo people eat, like sweet-potatoes, and highly-carb rich foods like honey.

But again, I think you can't go too wrong by eating a diet of mostly unprocessed and refined foods, whether it's paleo or not.

This has been my personal experience. I started eating "low-carb/high-fat" last September and just crossed the -60 pounds mark. I still marvel at how I'm just not very hungry most of the time, even after missing meals or exercising for several hours... or how I can, indeed, go ride my bike vigorously for a few hours before eating any breakfast.

I haven't counted calories at all, so from an objective sense, I can't give precise amount of wha I used to eat compared to what I eat now. However I'm certain I eat less from the mere fact that now I often miss meals (from not being hungry enough to bother) when before I might even eat 2 lunches, and snack much less than before (evidenced by the fact that I don't buy snacky foods much any more - when for example I was subscribed to Amazon to have boxes of KIND bars delivered to both my home and office). One of the best parts is that I can now take long bike rides after work (I've been a bike-commuter for a few years) and not have to rush home to eat dinner from crazy hunger.

I believe the theory about low-carb and hunger is that carbohydrates stimulate insulin production. This causes cells in the body (fat and muscle) to take up blood glucose more than they would otherwise, thereby lowering blood glucose. This dynamic system has delays, so blood glucose will drop below the "normal" level and as a result you get really hungry in order to raise it back up again. As a result, you either eat more or feel lethargic due to lack of energy. This may explain the need/desire to snack between breakfast and lunch and after lunch in order to stave off the fatigue and "crash" that most people experience at these times.

Some people go a bit nuts when I say I can eat as much as I want with this way of eating and still lose weight - as if they think I believe I'm violating the laws of physics. But the reality is that of course I'm obeying the laws of thermodymics - it's just that when I eat a diet low in carbohydrates, I just don't want to eat very much. And how can that be a bad thing? I'm getting fitter, feeling better, and all without being hungry or otherwise suffering.

This sounds like the foundation of the "Paleo" diet. And while this makes sense, I'm not sure there have been many good studies demonstrating the benefits of this approach. Part of the problem is establishing what "paleo" humans actually ate.

For example:

This is an assumption, and maybe a good one. But look at societies like the Masai. They're fairly "aboriginal" and eat mostly red meat, blood, and milk and very little plant matter (they apparently consider eating plants a sign of weakness). Other aboriginal societies live on diets dominated by coconuts and plants.

I think the problem today is that there are few sources of "original" food sources available. As a species we've domesticated most of the plants and animals we eat, changing them over time. So it's hard to rely on the concept of "eat what we ate a million years ago". The best we can do to determine optimal nutrtion now is try to conduct solid double-blind studies based on the foods we have available. Unfortunately that is expensive to do and most of the money in nutrition research comes from the food industry, which has a vested interest in the outcomes of the research they fund.

That said, you probably can't go too wrong by avoiding processed and refined foods, eating animals that eat what they naturally eat, and eating plants that are grown with as few chemical interventions as possible.