Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Not a surprise, but is it just one ingredient? (Score 1) 293

by drinkypoo (#48184823) Attached to: Soda Pop Damages Your Cells' Telomeres

It actually doesn't get any more simple than that, but too many people think there's some kind secret or potential magic cure for weight loss. Other than liposuction,

...there is also the low-carbohydrate modified fast commonly known today as the Atkins diet, in which it is possible to eat thousands of calories of fat (difficult, but possible, I've done it ho ho ho) and still lose weight. In my case, 10lb/mo for 9mo of sitting on ass and stuffing face. I'm asthmatic and I was too fat to exercise comfortably. I went from 380 to 290 packing my maw with massive steaks the size of a plate, eggs and bacon, and mixing-bowl sized salads showered with bleu cheese dressing. My cholesterol counts, blood pressure, and heart rate? Never better.

I call being able to remain full and lose weight rapidly close enough to magic for my purposes.

Comment: Re:Not a surprise, but is it just one ingredient? (Score 1) 293

by drinkypoo (#48184811) Attached to: Soda Pop Damages Your Cells' Telomeres

So am I safe if I alternate 12 oz diet soda with 12 oz water?

Safe from the water, anyway. But diet soda may well have other health concerns, because of the crap that's in it.

Ever notice how some food additives get renamed every few years? We actually had a law protecting us from renaming of MSG and Aspartame, which had to be called those particular things, but now we don't any more and so now the former is being called "yeast extract" and the latter is being called by brand names with which people aren't familiar. This is how you know the FDA of today is evil. Labeling requirements are basically all they should even be involved with.

Comment: Re:Cumulative? How about other quantities? (Score 1) 293

by drinkypoo (#48184803) Attached to: Soda Pop Damages Your Cells' Telomeres

I spent a few years drinking 6 or more free coca-colas a day (through two employers with free soda) and wound up with an ulcer, which went away in short order when I stopped. There's many reasons not to drink sugarwater in a can. I just had an argument about this with my lady, my contention was that soda fountains were a great thing but that soda in a can is a monkey on society's back. She thought it was all bad :)

Comment: Re:Sugar only - not diet (Score 1) 293

by drinkypoo (#48184795) Attached to: Soda Pop Damages Your Cells' Telomeres

Plain old sugar, as others point out, is glucose+sucrose. HFCS is ~sucrose+sucrose+glucose+other. Even if you discount the "other" as fear mongering, the different ratio of the 'oses results in different metabolic by products.

HFCS differs from regular CS by 5%. Build a bridge and get over it. HFCS is not the problem, the use of HFCS to replace vegetable oil in processed foods is the problem. It has a similar effect on final texture, believe it or not. So then they load it up with a shitload of citric acid, which also isn't good for you in excess! It's fine and even good in smaller amounts, but not in the wads necessary to kill the sweetness of the HFCS when you abuse it.

Comment: Re:Trolls poised to take over the world (Score 1) 331

by drinkypoo (#48184773) Attached to: In UK, Internet Trolls Could Face Two Years In Jail

I find it breathtaking TFA would focus almost entirely on rape threats while largely remaining silent on the really insane aspects of this law.

It's really not surprising that someone, whipped into a froth, would make frothy decisions and statements. We do need to do something about rape culture. Handing government a club which they can use to beat people not involved in it is a move born of fear, and it will lead to abuse.

Comment: Re:It's not censorship or more government control (Score 1) 331

by drinkypoo (#48184767) Attached to: In UK, Internet Trolls Could Face Two Years In Jail

I think a lot of people are misinterpreting the intent of this.

No, no we are not. The intent is obviously to broaden the reach of government over issues of speech. But since hate speech is already illegal, there's no need for a new law. Just apply existing laws to the internet! Done and done.

Comment: Re:Trolls are the lowest form of life. . . (Score 1) 331

by drinkypoo (#48184759) Attached to: In UK, Internet Trolls Could Face Two Years In Jail

The day you finally finish High School and move out of your parents' basement you may find out just how wrong you are.

That may have seemed clever when you were starting out, but it was a staggeringly stupid thing to say. It must have been nice to skip high school so that you could remain so astoundingly ignorant.

Comment: People who start comments in subjects are the lowe (Score 1) 331

by drinkypoo (#48184755) Attached to: In UK, Internet Trolls Could Face Two Years In Jail

Trolls are the lowest form of life. . .

People who start comments in subjects are the lowest form of life.

. . . especially the ones behind using the internet to interfere with people's real lives

Just saying something mean is doing that. Pay attention.

Despite it's flaws, the near absolute interpretation of the constitutional right to the freedom of speech by the US Supreme Court

BAHAHAHAHAHAAHAH

Every article in the bill of rights has been superseded by law, such as the U SAP AT RIOT act or NDAA. Every single one. You have no rights. Ferguson proved we do not even have freedom of press, let alone expression or assembly.

Comment: Re:So what qualifies? (Score 1) 331

by drinkypoo (#48184751) Attached to: In UK, Internet Trolls Could Face Two Years In Jail

How are Finnigan's comments trolling? She was expressing her (arguably ill-informed) opinion.

Aye, there's the rub. If history is any indication, this law will be abused immediately to punish other people who are not trolling. With one sweep of the pen, they are criminalizing being wrong. The law of intended consequences.

Comment: Re:That's absurd, aim your hate cannon elsewhere. (Score 3, Insightful) 220

by drinkypoo (#48184735) Attached to: If You're Connected, Apple Collects Your Data

They don't make money by selling user information to third parties or by selling ads

Sure, it's not their main cash cow, but they do sell ads, with targeting and analytics.

Yes, they do offer a service to developers, but they don't use it themselves in any app I'm aware of.

Moving the goalposts is a logical fallacy commonly employed by fanboys (or in this case, iFanboys) who know full well that a claim which casts their favorite thing in a bad light is true. And the stated claim is true. You've only proven your iFanboy nature with your above comment. Thanks, though, for proving that Apple fans have to fall back on lies and deception in order to seem like they have a point. Even as stated, your words are false. When you pay for an Apple product (a piece of hardware running iOS) it does not prevent Apple from spying on you; to the contrary, it enables it. And since Apple is in charge of the App Store, and they created this API specifically for apps sold through their App Store, they are directly responsible for distributing apps which utilize it to you on multiple levels.

Comment: Re:Android (Score 1) 73

by drinkypoo (#48184711) Attached to: Google Releases Android 5.0 Lollipop SDK and Nexus Preview Images

Seriously the first three articles I click on have links to apps and YouTube videos of how to do it

google users do not get the same search results. Do you even google, bro?

By the way the absurdity of complaining about an app that costs half the price of the USB otg cable and 0.75% of the tablet cost is astounding.

Sorry, I'm used to living in a software ecosystem where people help one another for free.

In 2012 it was damn difficult to install Cm.

Maybe for you.

Comment: Oh yeah. :) (Score 3, Insightful) 323

by fyngyrz (#48182837) Attached to: Apple Doesn't Design For Yesterday

Most clickable things on the web don't have boxes to make them look like physical buttons.

Those are hyperlinks. That's the generally accepted, even traditional, look for a hyperlink. You do know what a hyperlink is, do you not? When I click a hyperlink, I expect to arrive on a web page forthwith. That's what they mean. But that's not what these mean. These mean... random stuff. Normal words... are words. Underlined and/or blue-colored words are hyperlinks. Buttons, despite Ive's insane, drooling jihad against skeuomorphism, should look like you are expected to reach over and press them. This leverages the user's familiarity with the real world (something I admit I don't think I can assume you have) and creates a natural understanding of an implied action just by existing. An action, I might add, that is not hyperlinking. Because we use, you know, highlighted words for that. How would you react to a stereo that had no buttons, just words on its face? Is that intuitive? Of bloody course it isn't. You press a button, it depresses, it looks different, it clicks, you know to expect the action to occur. If it's a toggled state, the button stays in. Natural. Normal. Expected. But a word? Where's the premise for touching a word? Where indeed? Hyperlinks, you say? YES! BLOODY HYPERLINKS!

Ives is probably the worlds foremost product designer

Ah. Ah ha. Ha. Ha Ha Ha. Oh, that is priceless. Just priceless. Ive's work is at best, a mixed bag, and he surely isn't the world's foremost designer. I can think of any number of designers that make him look like the pretentious hack he is. Starting with any number of supercar designers, wandering off into audio equipment and musical instrument design, heck, there are even refrigerators that are designed better than Ive's work product. Also, Scott Forstall's ideas were far better in terms of design than Ives. He just wasn't minimalist -- but minimalist is not a synonym for "good", and in fact, very seldom is that the case.

Also, look at the new Mac Pro. What a dysfunctional failure-storm. Can't install drives in it, doesn't fit in with other equipment well, requires desk warts to be even reasonably functional... expansion is a plug-addled nightmare... even the plugs themselves can be pulled right out, no security (physical or data) whatsoever. Oh yeah, Ives. I wouldn't let that guy "design" my kitchen. He'd probably take out all the plugs, knobs and buttons, color everything silver, and not allow silverware dividers in the drawers or pots on the stove. But you'd get a microwave with only one setting, and son, you'd be expected to like it. And you... well, you probably would. Lacking any kind of taste as you do. ;)

You're one of these people that will always be a reactionary against change.

Yes, absolutely, that's why I praise Mavericks so highly after years of buggy OS's left unfixed. That's why I thought "awesome" when the fully expandable Mac Pro came out, and why I bought right in. That's why I changed from Windows to the Mac. That's why I generally have the latest in home theater gear. That's why I have a Tesla on order. That's why I cohabit instead of marry. That's why I'm atheist and not theist. That's why I just took in a severely injured kitten. That's why I get such a kick out of messing with a Raspberry Pi, cobbling up little RPi projects we can use around the house. That's why my favorite literary genre is hard science fiction. That's why I have moved to SDRs, away from conventional radios. In fact, that's why I write SDR software.

Yeah, I'm just terrified of change, you bet. You crack me up. Any other "insights" you might care to share while you're making things up out of the clear blue? I think Fox News is holding a place for you, better get right over there.

Let me attempt to clue you in here: I'm not "afraid of the new Mac Pro because it's.... new", I dislike it because they functionally crippled it and because they compromised its reliability. I'm not "afraid of Yosemite because it looks different", I don't like it because it is unintuitive. because it is known to have privacy issues, and because it is ugly, which I would hasten to point out to you, since you clearly don't get it, is not in any way the same thing as "new."

I think your actual problem is that you pee down your leg when another Apple user doesn't play the sycophant as you expect. Can't help you with that. In my worldview, something is good when it actually is good. Not just because it came from a particular source.

+ - If you're connected, Apple collects your data. No matter what.->

Submitted by fyngyrz
fyngyrz (762201) writes "It would seem that no matter how you configure Yosemite, Apple is listening. Keeping in mind that this is only what's been discovered so far, and given what's known to be going on, it's not unthinkable that more is as well. Should users just sit back and accept this as the new normal? It will be interesting to see if these discoveries result in an outcry, or not."
Link to Original Source

Google News Sci Tech: NASA says 1934 Dust Bowl was worst drought in 1000 years: Here's what NASA ... -->

From feed by feedfeeder

Tech Times

NASA says 1934 Dust Bowl was worst drought in 1000 years: Here's what NASA ...
Tech Times
The Dust Bowl of 1934 was the worst dry period in 1,000 years, according to NASA. That doesn't reveal the human suffering it caused, or the art it helped to create. (Photo : Arthur Rothstein / Farm Security Administration)...
NASA and Tree Rings Confirm 1934 Drought Worst in Last 1000 YearsSavingAdvice.com
How the Dust Bowl Stacks Up Against Other DroughtsThe News Ledge
1934 drought worst in millenniumThe Hoops News
The Guardian-Capital Wired-Beta Wired
all 84 news articles

Link to Original Source

Reference the NULL within NULL, it is the gateway to all wizardry.

Working...