Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

typodupeerror

## Comment Re:So slashdotters (Score 4, Insightful)293

But this probably will close the door on the 99 cases out of 100 where an IP actually does equal a bad person who needs to be caught.

I'm not sure about the 99/100 figure. However, even if that's true, I'd argue that just because something is a 99% accurate indicator of crime, it doesn't justify a forfeiture of rights for the other 1%. Is having an IP address linked to an illegal activity justification to open an investigation? Sure. Enough to break in and confiscate property of an individual who has an open WAP living in a populated area? Probably not. Keep in mind people committing internet crimes are "crafty" and know that its important to hide their own identities (often, masking them as the identities of others)

## Comment Re:Both? (Score 1)266

Normally, I'd dog on the editors for this too, but I just noticed the, the "OMG wyte ifone" submission has almost twice the comments as this announcment...it'll be interesting to check back on the comment count in a few hours to see what /.'ers really care about these days!

## Comment Re:Grain of salt (Score 1)157

My thoughts exactly...

Symmetric, (Strictly) diagonally dominant matrices are great: Non-singular, real spectrum, diagonalizable...In fact, purely from the fact that the eigenvalues can be bounded away from 0, many iterative methods will have provably fast O(n^2) convergence...beating the classic O(n^3) by an order of magnitude.

I'm not up to speed in the particular tricks used for the Symmetric, DD regime, but certainly one would only "naively" try solving this using Gaussian elimination, due to the special structure. One thing I thought was interesting was that the authors mention that the "previous" fast algorithm solves in:

O(n*log(n)^25).

Well, for n 10^52 (HUUUUUUUUUUUGE!!!) n^2 is less than nlog(n)^25, so there complexity constant becomes really important!!! I can't imagine that the "previous" algorithm was useful (practically speaking!)

-unperson

## Comment My Results (Score 1)1806

First, thank you for given me motivation enough to post my first reply to slashdot in years!

The Past:

I could have written this very "ask slashdot" 2 years ago. I was around 30yrs old, weighed over 230 pounds. I have always thought my health to be "good", but I'm in a high-risk category for heart disease, and had been gaining weight steadily since late college. When my wife told me we were implementing family+=1, I became (for the first time) aware that my health was very important to the health of my family, and decided I should try to do something about it.

The Present:

I weigh about 180lbs. I'm in the best shape of my life (in the cardiovascular sense) though I probably wouldn't break my personal bench press records I had in high school. But then again, I can do 50 push-ups, which I guarantee I was never able to do in high school!

With similar thinking to the user who wrote this ask /., the breakthrough (for me) was to be able to exercise in my home. Career and personal obligations as well as, sure...personal insecurity, made me very unlikely to succeed in a fitness center environment. So, I bit the bullet and bought a midrange (\$1500) elliptical trainer. I found this ideal for me because:

1. High calorie burning aerobic workout.
2. Fairly natural motion, very little fatigue (but I should mention it is crucial to try many different models from various manufacturers...I tested about a dozen and found all but a few to be awkward).
3. Privacy. Less important for me now.
4. Convienience (somedays, 5am is the only time, others, 8pm). I don't want to go to make a long drive to a gym (for me) on icy roads just to workout.
5. zone-out-ability. I listen to the radio, watch TV, or sometimes, just think about my life. Try doing that in a gym with activity all over the place. I literally "lose myself" during my 50 minute workout, and making the time go by quickly and painlessly is probably the most important reason it has worked for me.

At first, I started with 3-4 30 minute workouts a week (okay, at "very first" they were 20 minutes). At my peak, I was doing 5 50-60 minute workouts a week (that was insane!). Now, I do 3-4 50 minute workouts a week. My machine tells me, based on my weight, that I burn about 900 calories. I started this when I got to around 175 pounds (which I thought was as small as I needed to be) and have bounced back ever so slightly (but generally maintain 180) at this current level.

I have also been incorporating crunches/push ups/ and 5 or 6 sets of free weights a few times a week, just to get a little balance. The pushups and crunches definately have toned my chest and abs, and the increased muscle there makes me look a lot better without a shirt than I did even 5 pounds less ago. Speaking of that, the most positive unanticipated side effect was becoming more attractive to the opposite sex...I might be in a monogamous relationship, but getting a flirtatious look from an attractive, young woman stranger can turn a bad day into a great day!

The Future:

I've been starting to try to incorporate other things. On days where its nice, I might trade an elliptical session with a 40 minute, 5 mile jog. Bad knees run in my family, so I'll probably never try to run a marathon. Might try biking. I have also begun to try some yoga to help with flexibility and back pain issues I've had for many years...just started that a few days ago, as a matter of fact.

Anyway, this is what worked for me. I hope whatever you do, you stick to it. Once you see some results, you won't find that very difficult to do.

# Slashdot Top Deals

"Oh what wouldn't I give to be spat at in the face..." -- a prisoner in "Life of Brian"

Working...