Comment Re:artificial sweeteners spike insulin (Score 1) 630
Here's hoping they don't use use Sucralose, which is even worse than Aspartame
That's about as likely as slashdot posters starting to read the articles that are posted.
Here's hoping they don't use use Sucralose, which is even worse than Aspartame
That's about as likely as slashdot posters starting to read the articles that are posted.
I suspect, at some point, feature phone people will find themselves unable to operate normally in society. They'll have to get a smartphone or become noticeably eccentric.
I'm seeing early signs of that already. People send me texts that come in as giant multimedia messages, and my Hispanic friend with whom I practice Spanish texts me in Spanish and the phone mangles it and I have to call back and ask what he said.
I hope we reach "peak phone" soon, because for those of us who don't spend every waking moment with our cell phone, the shit which is focused around that is kind of tedious.
I'm waiting for that moment to pass, and then I will finally get a smart phone. My wife has a smart phone, but I'm the techie, and I still have a flip phone. It's $15, no contract, easily replaceable, and does everything that my first $250 flip phone did years ago. I'm thrilled with it.
These chimps can get copyrights! Don't let that one photographer near them.
http://metro.co.uk/2011/07/14/...
Whee!
I'm reasonably confident that after he sold Lucasfilm to Disney, his interest in making a movie studio dropped greatly.
IMarv
As long as the isps to my home are monopolies I don't want them engaging in "value added" services.
So what we really want is for the government grant of monopoly privilege to be taken away.
I think it is a book, 1984. But I don't remember this part...
Hmm
If you are such a whiny idiot that you think it should be OK to say "we don't serve your kind here", then you should have no legal or moral basis to claim that someone shouldn't be able to do the same to you.
Yes, I agree. People should be able to refuse to do business with someone for any reason whatsoever, and vice versa. Religious conviction shouldn't have any special status in law above any other type of preference or desire.
So either shut up, and accept that you have no other ways you're legally allowed to discriminate against someone
I agree and accept this.
Thank you, but I would rather be a self-responsible citizen than one of millions of ant-like creatures to be ruled by a self-declared elite
Isn't that what I was saying?
Secondly, it's an important biomedical advancement made by citizen scientists. (The important part of that sentence is "by citizen scientists".)
I was a little confused when I saw that wording in the story, and now that I'm hearing this wording is the important part, I'm getting a little concerned. Are we not all citizens? Have we been divided into citizens and ruling class, now?
I'm all for popularizing science among all citizens, but I'd rather we word that as "science for the masses" or something.
You really think Amazon wants to take the PR hit by suing a contractor who worked in their warehouse for 10 dollars an hour?
Great, then they should have no problem removing the portion of the agreement that would give them the right to do so.
Don't go on a diet (Hacker's Diet or otherwise), but do make a permanent change to your lifestyle.
The Hacker's Diet is a permanent change in lifestyle. People don't always use the word "diet" to mean a temporary change. There are many diets that are permanent changes in lifestyle, and the word "diet" also has a technical definition in which it means what an organism eats - in that sense, everyone has a diet.
For those of us who do not always use the word "diet" to mean a temporary change, it is annoying to try to talk about a permanent change in diet and be corrected and contradicted by those who use the word diet to mean only a temporary change.
If A = B and B = C, then A = C, except where void or prohibited by law. -- Roy Santoro