That's a great application! I'm sure people with the money would spend a small fortune on that even if it's a novelty.

I was talking about it with my wife and she had a really good extension: sperm banks. Right now you get some written information about the donor, but can't get anything really detailed. Imagine if you could offer women the opportunity to see what their children might look like based on their DNA and that of the donor. I'm sure that would be a very popular value-added service.

Someone help me out here. I can understand why they would be running XP. It was a stable OS and it was used in a lot of embedded systems. They probably don't want to just replace the underlying operating system on a computer running a nuclear submarine or something.

Office, though? What are they doing? Using a mail merge macro to address the nuclear missiles on said submarine? Why the heck can't they just replace that with minimal issues?

At the end of the day, though, I'm not that worried. $9.1 million is a drop in the bucket compared to the nearly $700 billion DoD budget. There's a whole lot more pork in that barrel to be worried about.

Brilliant! Everything is part of the performance! I really love it. It takes it to a whole new level of meta.Thank you for that insight.
I had never thought of framing it like that. I had approached the situation from the assumption that her actions were of anger/spite, but you're absolutely correct. I wonder how deep this rabbit hole can go...

I completely agree and wish that I had mod points. I see her response almost as a parody of the ridiculousness of the entire situation. I don't know how a court would decide, but I would definitely argue that the response is transformative in the same way as Prince's work. The only problem is the way in which she was "marketing..these prints as cheaper alternatives to Prince’s.." and that would make the argument that they are a new work of art very difficult.

No problem. It sucks to see people suffer.
Anyway, I just thought I'd clarify that Major Depressive Disorder essentially is clinical depression. It's the heading that the DSM-V (psych bible) puts continued depression of greater than two weeks. You might have heard the term unipolar depression as well. That just means that there are no manic states associated with the patient. Unless you're a nervous person by nature (think you're going to get every side effect and complication) it's probably worth your time to read up on your condition a bit. Increased health literacy is associated with improved outcomes.

This I get. and this you will get instant results from these kinds of meds. When they first came out on the market, they pushed them for depression. Granted, they work great for that. We have, however, since then realized there are better ways to deal with the situation. So now we give people SSRI's because they're generally "safer" and less addictive (Don't let anyone tell you that the withdrawal doesn't suck, though. Back off them slowly...) The downside is that the SSRI's take a while (4-6 weeks) for full effectiveness if you're going to get any results from that particular agent at all.

This one needs to be smashed with a stick and nuked from orbit. No it's no all your fault (at least I hope it's not), but people need to learn personal responsibility in this world. I think that's the general sentiment around here, though, so no need to preach to the choir.

I'm no psychiatrist and I've never met you, so I can't diagnose you. I am, however, glad that you're getting help from at least one. That sounds like it fits the bill for Major Depressive Disorder. The good news is that there are A LOT of options. The bad news is that sometimes it can take a while to find one that sticks. The interesting thing about a lot of those drugs is that in addition to taking the taking a bit of the edge off the depression is that they increase the plasticity of the brain. So, combined with Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, they can help change the way you think about yourself. If you find that the medication alone just isn't cutting it and you're not already getting CBT, I would ask your doctor to recommend a therapist. Regardless, good luck with it and I hope you do find some kind of therapy (pharmaceutical or otherwise) that works.

I think you spelled MBA wrong.

Very well might be cheaper, but probably not that much, especially if you have an insurance plan that will cover it. The advantage of Adderall over street meth is increased duration of action. Adderall is formulated as a combination of several different amphetamine salts that release and become active at different times. That way you get smoother, more constant blood levels without big peaks or big drops. Those smaller changes make for less abuse liability to boot.

It's worth mentioning that one reason amphetamine (Adderall) and methylphenidate (Ritalin) are such strong stimulants because they are what's called "impulse independent." They don't just make your neurons work better/fire faster; they actually REVERSE the flow of your reuptake transporter. Your neurotransmitters don't get recycled like normal. So, if you take too high of a dose for too long, you can use up the neurotransmitters faster than your body can replace them. That's why it can take so long to get back to normal.
These ARE powerful stimulants and they shouldn't be abused. There IS addiction potential. There ARE downsides to them. This whole trend of overuse/reliance on pharmaceuticals is just bonkers to me. I don't get it. I really don't.

That's not even the worst of them. You get into the steroids and the estrogens and you're in for a real treat. They're all derived from cholesterol so they all have the same basic structure. Then there are several commonly accepted names for modified structures. So...some people will start with a simple base structure name and use the IUPAC rules to list all the substituents. Others will start with a more complicated (but named) base structure and just say 19-nor-whatever (to indicate that the substituent that SHOULD be attached to that carbon isn't) to refer to the same structure. It's confusing. I'm just glad I'm not a medicinal chemist and that the FDA gives us trade names so that one pharmacist knows what the other pharmacist is talking about.