Much of Canada is already quite easily habitable, it's just that there's nothing there to draw people to it. For a simple example take a look at Alberta. Looking at 2011 numbers the population of the province is 3.6 million, with about two-thirds of that living in Calgary and Edmonton. There's a LOT of wide open land that could easily be filled up with people and their stuff. If you had ten million people and some start-up capital you could build a metropolis somewhere between Calgary and the Montana border with easy access to roads, rails, farmland, water, etc. For reference, New York City has an area about 15 sq. mi. smaller than Calgary and roughly eight times the population.
McDonald's has NFC enabled Interac handsets in their drive-thru. I wave my wallet at a machine for coffee a couple times a day. It's really more uncommon for me to find a vendor/retailer who *doesn't* have the NFC terminals these days. Back on topic, does this mean the new iPhones won't be able to use their NFC for anything besides payments? I quite like touching the backs of two NFC enabled android phones together to send links, contacts, photos, etc.
I've never been involved in a SWAT raid but my understanding from TV and movies is that they have to identify themselves when they enter. Are they identifying themselves as police or as private security? If it's the former, can they be charged with impersonating police officers? And if it's the latter can they be charged with break and enter? I feel like the castle doctrine/"stand your ground" law would absolve you of guilt if someone busted through your door yelling "PRIVATE SECURITY CORPORATION" and you shot them in the face...
not sure how easily verified these would be, but this page gives a list of things they claim it's a better fit than conventional methods.
Ketoacidosis isn't a concern for anyone who can produce insulin.
The science is not, in fact, that easy, for a number of reasons. Off the top of my head:
- "Energy Out" calculations can't be made in a vacuum; the amount of energy your body burns doing any exercise (even at rest) is largely determined by your current body composition, ie. more muscle mass takes more energy to maintain
- All calories are not utilized the same; protein, for example, is used to build/repair structures and is not burned as "fuel". Counting protein calories is essentially useless, though tracking the amount consumed can be helpful (approximately one gram per pound of lean mass per day is considered a good baseline for an adult male of average activity level)
- Certain foods trigger certain hormonal responses in the body that can effect metabolism. Insulin is a storage hormone. Anything that triggers a strong insulin response (sugars/grains) will predispose you to storing more of your "energy in". Likewise, staying too low on the "energy in" side of the equation will make your body think it's starving which will adversely effect metabolism. There are numerous studies showing that starvation diets don't work beyond short-term.
These are just the easy ones I can come up with without doing any real research. For a great example of how you can lose a lot of body fat (not just "weight") while not counting calories in/out, see "Four Hour Body" by Tim Ferriss.
Fellow Canadian here. I'm fairly ignorant on all of the health care stuffs as I seem to have been blessed (so far) with decent health and no major accidents or injuries requiring expensive treatments. I'm a 35 y.o. male with no dependents or pre-existing conditions and a non-smoker. My health care costs show up as a $26 line item on my bi-weekly paychecks. What the fucking fuck America?
Have yourself a look at the diet of the Maasai; meat, milk, and blood - all raw. Some groups eat small quantities of fruits and veg, some do not.
On a recent trip I rented a Hyundai Elantra. The bluetooth-enabled stereo wouldn't let you sync a phone while the vehicle was in gear, which kind of frustrated my passenger who wanted to sync up his phone and listen to some tunes.
Can you point out to me where in the document you link for "Haliburton Loophole" it says that that's a myth? All I see is the Energy Policy Act of 2005; Section 322 of that document indicates that ‘‘(ii) the underground injection of fluids or propping agents (other than diesel fuels) pursuant to hydraulic fracturing operations related to oil, gas, or geothermal production activities.’’ are exempted from the "Underground Injection" provisions of the Safe Drinking Water Act. Additionally the Clean Water Act was amended to clarify that "water, gas, or other material which is injected into a well to facilitate production of oil or gas..." are NOT classified as pollutants. These two things together seem to indicate that they can in fact pump whatever they'd like into wells to facilitate oil production, even if it's not labeled specifically as "The Haliburton Loophole". Am I missing something?
I clicked your username to see if it shows on your page, and sure enough there's the submission, with your proper full name. I'm hoping Dick Butkus submits a story, just to see if it's changed to "Richard B". HEY DICK! YOU READING THIS?!
My problem with this reply from Soulskill is that he's talking about a feature that's very core to the
i used up the last of my mod points last night, but as soon as i get more i'll be back to modding everything 'fuck beta' as insightful, and everything else as 'off topic'. drown 'em in noise, boys!