Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Do you not understand the problem with asking? (Score 2) 312

by Kr1ll1n (#46680541) Attached to: Why No Executive Order To Stop NSA Metadata Collection?

The very fact that you ask this question should indicate the problem.

This question comes from a place of trust. "I trust our president to do the right thing. Why hasn't he?" This line of thought is almost identical to that of a battered spouse saying "he beats me because he loves me!" By asking the question, you are defending the indefensible and giving the benefit of the doubt.

To further the point, look at those that claim "it is just metadata", in defense of the program.

What is the metadata of an M4A file?

[/share/MD0_DATA/NAS/iTunes/Music/Jack White/Blunderbuss] # strings 04\ Love\ Interruption.m4a | more
com.apple.iTunes
name
iTunNORM
jdata
--RETRACTED (hex hash, could be tied to account)--
!data
Love Interruption
data
Jack White
"aART
data
Jack White
data
Jack White
data
Blunderbuss
gnre
data
  trkn
data
disk
data
cpil
data
$data
2012-04-23T07:00:00Z .apID
&data
--RETRACTED (verified as iTunes Account info)--
cnID
data
atID
data
  plID
data
stik
data
+purd
#data
2012-12-31 03:11:01
)sonm
!data
Love Interruption
#soal
data
Blunderbuss
"soar
data
Jack White
`)covr
`!data
JFIF
--More--

As you can see, I had to retract metadata off of an M4A file, just to keep my info secure. Metadata is not some cryptic bit of info, depending on the detail. For all I know, there may still be identifiable info in what I have posted already......

Comment: Re:Tech's Gender and Race Gap Starts In High Schoo (Score 1) 489

by Kr1ll1n (#45947285) Attached to: Tech's Gender and Race Gap Starts In High School

But anyway, firstly pink for girls is a 100% social construct (pink used to be for boys 100 or so years ago). But, your daughter is subjected to immense peer pressure.

Agreed.

Second, girs do like bright shiny colourful things, but so do boys. In fact so do adults but they're generally better at suppressing it. Nonetheless, there's a reason sports cars are generally not matte grey.

Attractiveness of objects isn't the subject of discussion. The type of objects children of certain genders pull towards is.

Third it doesn't matter: they can still grow up to be scientists if that's what they want. Playing with dresses and dolls as a kid doesn't alter that.

Nobody ever suggested it did. What was suggested was that girls tend to gravitate towards certain objects of play, which in the long run, does not benefit them if they were to pursue something more technical in nature, later on in life.

Fourth, while you're there to guide your kid and influence where you can, if you try to force her in to being something she's not in order to please you, then you will be disappointed, and she will be upset.

Nobody ever said anything about forcing the issue. Exposure does not equate to force, and it is incredibly disingenuous to suggest that it is.

Finally, your kids probably won't grow up to be tech geeks. Most of the population (male or female) is not.

Intelligence can provide a better quality of life, assuming self-control is exercised as well. Being a "tech geek" would only suggest they have a better chance at a higher quality of life.Many other scientific disciplines would do the same.

Comment: Re:Tech's Gender and Race Gap Starts In High Schoo (Score 1) 489

by Kr1ll1n (#45947133) Attached to: Tech's Gender and Race Gap Starts In High School

Likewise, you can't just sit there and say;

"Societal pressure is the problem!" when many others have examples (yourself included) of a societal pressure failing miserably. The plural of anecdote is data, and believe me, there is plenty of it that suggests girls and guys each pull towards different things, despite what others around them are trying to expose them to.

Comment: Re:Tech's Gender and Race Gap Starts In High Schoo (Score 2) 489

by Kr1ll1n (#45932295) Attached to: Tech's Gender and Race Gap Starts In High School

As a father of a girl;

BULLSHIT.

I have exposed my daughter to every tech and geek part of myself I can possibly throw at her.
She loves gadgets, but only for the games. She doesn't want to tear them apart.
She loves to dance and sing.
She loves wearing pretty princess dresses.
She loves playing house with her baby dolls.

I have actually tried to steer her away from pink, frilly crap, and since she inherited her father's strong will, she refuses to budge.

Comment: Re:Urban versus rural [Re:red v blue] (Score 1) 285

by Kr1ll1n (#45701507) Attached to: Census Bureau: Majority of Affluent Counties In Northeast US

Of course, you, in your snobby rural superiority kick, may not value such things, you may decide to dismiss all of this as unimportant and unnecessary, all the while deriding urbanites for their arrogance, as they aren't the plain and simple folk of the rural areas who do what's important.

Pot, meet kettle. Kettle, meet pot.

Comment: Re:Type-1 Diabetic Here (Score 1) 670

by Kr1ll1n (#45636087) Attached to: Diet Drugs Work: Why Won't Doctors Prescribe Them?

Thank you for the heartfelt and kindred response.

My last A1c was 6.3, so I have become quite good at controlling my glucose levels so far. As I have finally quit smoking but retain the nicotine dependency, of which I have whittled down from 24mg to 16mg so far, (after 18 years as a pack a day smoker, I moved to vaping), I find myself taking one bad habit at a time. The food will be the worst, but I already feel myself starting to self-correct on the appetite front, and I know it's only a matter of time.

I am also incredibly appreciative that someone else out there understood exactly where I was coming from.

Thank you, good luck yourself, and Godspeed.

Comment: Re:Type-1 Diabetic Here (Score 1) 670

by Kr1ll1n (#45636063) Attached to: Diet Drugs Work: Why Won't Doctors Prescribe Them?

My comment is highly rated because of what it says, and not because of the retaliatory speech.

You can read through these very comments and see the amount of hate and vitiriol coming from the borderline psychotic-level "fit" crowd.
The fact that you would label those who would not stand idly by and tolerate that level of aggression, as the angry and hateful party, just shows how
out of touch with reality you are when it comes to just and fair treatment of others in a civil society.

I assume in your book a victim is not allowed to be angry at their oppressor.
Sounds like someone else needs some introspection before they claim others require it.

Comment: Re:Type-1 Diabetic Here (Score 1) 670

by Kr1ll1n (#45636009) Attached to: Diet Drugs Work: Why Won't Doctors Prescribe Them?

I see you keeping track of the things you know you need to, but I wonder if you've considered that there are just some foods that you shouldn't ever eat at all...

I don't think anyone is arguing that point.

I don't see how taking a new diet drug, which is what this article is about, is going to change your underlying condition. I'm not even certain that any of the new diet drugs are not contraindicated for people with type-1 diabetes. Personally, I wouldn't trust my physician if I had your condition and he attempted to prescribe me a new diet drug.

What impact did a steroid have on my own appetite? Considering I was putting down Wendy's triple cheeseburgers, a large fry, and even a frosty for lunch at age 11, I would say it had a major impact. Sometimes, people need something to aid them in overcoming an aggressive appetite. A bunch of people in better shape harping on them about how all they need to do is go on a diet and exercise more, isn't a solution. It's a canned response out of ignorance. If person "A" is overweight, eats very healthy, but doesn't exercise enough, is diet a solution? No. Many people become obese for similar reasons, but that doesn't mean they can all be treated the same.

There are specific foods that you can't have. Ever. I suspect you know what they are already, but just can't seem to replace them with the foods that aren't a problem. Without exception this is the real issue with people living with type-1 diabetes.

Type-1 diabetics, can eat any and all foods, but they have to be cognizant of the effect and impact. There is a difference between cannot, and should be cognizant of the side effects.

I'm almost certain stating this fact probably makes you want to throw me in that pit with the healthy people who are aggressive and passionately motivated about their own health to make the necessary sacrifices to maintain it. It doesn't change the facts. People manage to accomplish what you claim you can not do all the time. You aren't ready to do it, fine. That's YOU, in YOUR OWN HEAD. There will always be some drug company ready to exploit you because of this, and there will always be some doctor that reluctantly lets you have the latest pill that he knows isn't gong to help you long term one damn bit.

I want throw assholes who regurgitate empty platitudes at people they feel are physically beneath them, into a pit.
Likewise, I never claimed I couldn't do it. I only explained the deviations between doing it with a specific medical history, and the subsequent effects caused by the health problems, versus someone who gained 25-50 pounds, is in near perfect health, and dropped the weight through diet and exercise alone. The differences here should not be that hard to identify and understand.

Kill Ugly Processor Architectures - Karl Lehenbauer

Working...