Time to reboob.
What's surprising is that nobody here thinks this is an inherently sexist device. Don't men suffer from overeating as well? What about a jock strap that monitors them? Eating disorders are not strictly a female problem, and technology that is unisex has, at least in my experience, fared far better in the market place. How successful has Microsoft been at developing a computer "for women"? It hasn't been. It's a terrible and stupid idea; just like designing a car "for women" has been in that industry.
Attaching the device to a bra would be alright, but integrating it into it pretty much spells its doom on the market. About the only thing that's marketed to women I buy besides clothing is deodorant... because for some very strange reason, men seem to enjoy smelling like they swam through a high school chemistry lab's discarded waste.
you need to sabotage your workplace
do it discreetly, covertly, however you see fit
because your employer defiles founding principles this country was founded on
and you don't want to think of yourself as a vile goon working for a paycheck, right?
you have principles and you love your country, right?
It was a technology whose development was dictated by a few prominent government and military officials and large organizations...
Funny how patent reform took so long because of that exact description of the individuals involved, and how copyright mutated from being a public service to a industrial weapon to be used on one's business enemies. And all in the name of innovation. And now here we stand again, wondering why America can't innovate, why China is catching up and kicking our ass in more and more areas every year, and yet the thought never occurs: Maybe we need to burn the mansions to the ground, round up and execute the lawyers, and redistribute the wealth so that America returns its promise of the American Dream to its people, now long-held in forced captivity out of fear of terrorists, foreign powers, domestic powers, and in fact every fear to be popularized has been met with the exact same response: Giving the wealthy more money.
We've dug our own graves. Either we lay down in it in dignified prose, or we throw the people who demanded we dig down those holes instead. But don't think for a second this is a problem unique to the nuclear industry.
Show me someone building an airplane. Oh sorry, you need an FAA license for that... and they're talking about even taking away our toy airplanes because they can be turned into drones. How about a rocket? Ha ha, here's a form from the BATF for your background check to own "personal explosive devices". Flying car? Forget it... you can't even build a regular car in your garage now without running afoul of regulations. The only Big Thing to come out of this country in the last forty years that Joe Average had any hope of penetrating this hopelessly dense bureaucracy was the internet... and look how quickly patent and copyright law mutated to repress any attempt at innovation there. Now we're weaving digital restrictions into the very fabric of the network, building in kill switches, and militarizing it.
You want a solution? I got one: Round up all the rich people, shove them in trains, and ship them to concentration camps, and don't let them leave until every penny has been squeezed out of them. Yeah, it's the same thing the Nazis did. Yeah, I'm going there. Because they did manage to do one thing for Germany: It got them out from under the foot of other countries who were sucking their economy dry from WWI and preventing any industrialization. And then Hitler came along and he gave Germany everything he promised: A strong economy, everyone back to work, and independence. Of course, there was a catch...
But I welcome anyone to put a serious alternative on the table for how you can combat wealth inequity on a scale not seen since the industrialization of this country, and at current rates in a few decades will have us sliding backwards into wealth inequity rates not seen since the Dark Ages. I can think of precious few examples in human history where the poor numbered so many and the rich, through peaceful means, gave up their wealth. It is, traditionally, a very bloody affair.
and thank you for reading this week's episode of "Taking The Analogy Too Seriously"
join us next week when "hearing hoofbeats and thinking of zebras instead of horses" will be used to illuminate the principle of Occam's Razor
and DavidClarkeHR will ask "Are we on the Serengeti Plains of Tanzania? Because if we're on the Serengeti, I think this ruins the analogy"
Is it just me, or does it seem like everyone now-a-days is trying very hard to come up with new methodologies and paradigms and web 6.5isms, so they can get their 5 minutes in the lime light?
That's nothing. My new product turns the light plaid.
this idea is stupid
And why wouldn't
I'm not saying ReactOS is fully XP compatible, it's far from it at the moment. But perhaps with enough resources it would become compatible enough? Then maybe Microsoft will think twice before shoving stuff like Vista and Windows 8 to customers.
As it is you can already install the
Whether it works or not is another thing
For example, I don't see how you can decide what rights a human/animal hybrid has without first knowing what the cognitive capabilities of the hybrid are (is it more human or more animal in it's ability to understand itself and the world?
Doh. It's obvious. You know the upper bound of some future hybrid will at least be human (if not higher). And for others they won't be.
So why'd you need to create the problem first before working out the solution? And if you figure out there is no good solution to a theoretical problem why work towards making the theoretical problem a real problem? What's the benefit to the world that would make it worth it? So you can get a grant? Or because the benefit to everyone would be worth it?
The problem is, if we don't do it, someone else will.
That's a really stupid excuse to do stuff. Yes, if you don't jump off a cliff now, someone else may eventually do so. But if you don't do it now, it means it's more likely to happen later than earlier. And that buys the rest of us some time. There have been inventions and discoveries that were lost and took a long time to be reinvented/rediscovered again - so it's not like the "someone else will" is necessarily soon.
As for who is this "we", it's everyone. The more people who start thinking about whether it is really a good idea to do something from a long term and "big picture" perspective, the more likely things will be better for us. And that's why I posted about it.
It should be obvious that a Windows XP compatible OS is not for the sort who keep up with Microsoft's latest stuff.