Everyone knows that rich people don't deserve anything because of how priviledged they are. DUH.

That's fairly similar to the point system in the west, give or take. Have X amount of points, speeding makes you lose points, when you're at zero you're screwed.

Markup fail. I meant "Less than $100"

You're reading it wrong. Its not 50% of their daily income. Its 50% of their calculated disposable income.

So you take their yearly salary, minus some estimate of their cost of living, then divide the result by 2.

Using the same math as the rich people example above, the fine here would be $100

There hasn't been much value in writing code in a LONG time. You still need someone to do it, and it is somewhat time consuming (enough that people that do it aren't competing with bugger flippers...), but really, 95% of the value is between the time someone thinks up of a problem with a solution and its implementation design, until they open the text editor and start typing. After that point, a monkey could do it with a bit of support.

Oh, that strategy does work to some extent for sure. Though Apple's success has a lot more to do with their godly beyond comprehension marketing department than anything about the actual product. SOME of their product decisions don't hurt either, but its far from the main reason they're so popular.

No. If you're using the extract, then its not homeopathy. Time to read up.

You are not only confused, but also being duped. The only kind that would be considered homeopathic are the "highly diluted" ones. And by highly diluted, it means potentially thousands of times (ie: there is virtually no trace amount of the original ingredient in). That is the definition of homeopathy.

Homeopathy is when you take an active ingredient, put it in water, then dilute hundreds or even thousands of times until all the active ingredient is gone. Then by using a concept often referred to as the "memory of water", the nearly distilled water left is supposed to be more powerful than the original compound that contained the active ingredient.

If you have a non-trivial amount of active ingredient, then its naturopathy or even just "medicine". Those are often mislabeled on purpose, so that the real homeopathic treatments (which, being water, are impossibly cheap to produce), get traction.

As people mentioned already, that's not homeopathic. There's actually an active ingredient in there. Anything that isn't virtually distilled water is NOT homeopathy, and is generally naturopahy. If I can take your homeopathic remedy, analyze it, and easily find something that isn't pure H2O, then its simply not homeopathy at all. BY _DEFINITION_

No, that's not homeopathy. At all. You're describing naturopathy.

Homeopathy only has 1 compound. Water that once upon a time had something else in it and was diluted until there was nothing left of the original. Generally speaking, if there's anything but trace amount (if that) of the original compound, you're not done diluting yet. An homeopathic compound, scientifically, is pretty much always pure water.

Seems like several people are confusing the two in this thread. Homeopathy is not "natural products". It is something very specific (the above compound diluted so much there's only water left, along with some patient/practitioner relationship and near-rituals).

Except there's nothing to analyze in homeopathy. Its a mix of "relationship with the practitioner" and distilled water. that once upon a time (before it was more or less distilled) had something in it. It no longer does, so you won't find anything.

The tree bark and goat liver concoction and all that crap can potentially work, because there's SOMETHING in it, but that's naturopathy, not homeopathy, and its COMPLETELY different.

What makes things difficult, is that the people who are wrong don't know they're wrong.

So you have 2 people who think differently and thinking the other is wrong. Which one is? Who knows! Its easy in hindsight of course.

Chinese push it to the extreme though (disclaimer, my wife is chinese, and her family fit exactly the description above, and they freely admit it...my wife was born here and was kind of a rebel, thus why she broke the line and ended up with a white guy).

The length they'll go to avoid all "foreigners", even when they're in the middle of big cities, big schools, etc...All big companies have a "Chinese" mailing list that a ton of them subscribe to, eat together, go out together, only deal with doctors/contractors/etc who are chinese, etc. Its crazy.

Our brains are basically designed to spot differences and handle them as special case scenarios (thus why if I have a wall full of green dots and one is red, you'll probably notice the red dot before you realize there's a wall behind it).

We're also (understandably so) relate better to things that remind us of ourselves/our families/etc.

The two put together means someone who physically looks different than what you're used to, will automatically take a pretty big hit. Black people take the brunt of it, being a lot more different visually than, let say, a white westerner and an asian.

That's not enough in itself though. Black people in countries that don't have historical background relating to them will have a lot less racism issues.

Then tack on statistical differences in certain areas (ie: a city where there's a big economic divide with a high racial correlation, usually again because of historical reasons), and you hit a society perfect storm that will take a miracle (or just a lot of time....) to overcome.

That will heavily depend on how you do it. If you have a 1 to N, and insert the object trees one by one, you're going to get a crazy amount of back and forth. The amount of queries will be the same, and similar to the ones you do manually, so there won't be any meaningful differences there.

The main difference is that you're likely to do "Insert 1 in master, 5 in detail, 1 in master, 5 in detail", batching them in groups of 1 and N, when the correct way is to insert all the rows in master, then all the rows in details (batching in smaller groups if transaction size is a problem).

EF can handle that scenario just fine. Its just not that clean.

That's just understanding how an ORM work, and all ORMs have these issues. You get used to working around them. (You'd have a seizure seeing what Rails Active Record does, yet people use it in petabyte scenarios.)