Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

×

Comment: Re:We need more architectures (Score 1) 81

I believe you are thoroughly outdated in your knowledge of Intel architecture. At the hardware level, the only vestige of compatibility is the instruction decoder. Once you get past that, an Intel chip looks much like any other architecture in terms of features and composition.

(Yes, even x64 has fewer registers than some other architectures, but that's a design choice, not an architectural limit.)

Comment: Re:Here's MY test (Score 1) 515

by Dog-Cow (#49333703) Attached to: A Bechdel Test For Programmers?

Please outline the exact problem with the current situation. Are female programmers starving because they can't get work? Is the trouble in the ME caused by women locked out of programming jobs? Will Putin stop invading sovereign nations if we just hire more girls? Will poverty in the US cease the moment we start affirmative action to hire more women in tech? Will a 3rd party candidate finally be elected President?

Really. What exactly is the problem? What is objectively wrong about the current situation?

Comment: Re:Here's MY test (Score 1) 515

by Dog-Cow (#49333663) Attached to: A Bechdel Test For Programmers?

There has been zero evidence or proof that the current situation is bad in any qualitative or objective way. Thus, any effort to correct it is based on hand-wavy feelings that women should make up a larger percentage of the workforce. Hand-wavy feelings are never a good reason to force whole populations to do things they might not want to do. Basically, it's tyranny dressed up in political correctness.

Comment: There's not one answer (Score 1) 492

by Fished (#49328553) Attached to: Hacking Weight Loss: What I Learned Losing 30 Pounds

My dentist once told me that I obviously have viking blood. (He was right; I'm essentially half Scot and half Russian.) I am also a diabetic. I'm not alone. Roughly a third of Americans at this point are either diabetic or on the road to diabetes. If I ate the kind of carbs this guy eats, I'd have to load up on hundreds of units of insulin, and I'd never lose a pound. That's not speculation, I've tried that sort of diet. (Was a vegetarian for years, and couldn't lose weight on a 1200 Calorie vegetarian diet. And I was ravenously hungry and depressed all the time.)

Instead, the diet that has worked for me (very successfully) has been cutting the carbs. Most of my calories come from meat. I eat 4 or more eggs and bacon for breakfast. I quickly learned, by following my blood sugar meter, that I simply could not tolerate the 200+ grams of carbs that the government recommends. Since making the decision to follow my blood sugar 100% and ignore studies that, at best, present an average of what worked for someone else, I've lost well over 100 lbs. while increasing my lean body mass. My trigclycerides, once over 1000, have plunged. My HDL is high, my LDL is low, and most importantly my last A1c (a measure of blood sugar over time) was normal for a non-diabetic at 4.9%.

I'm glad his diet worked for him. It wouldn't work for me. No doubt, my diet wouldn't work for him. And that's ok. The notion that there's one perfect diet for everyone is virtually idiotic. And, most importantly, it doesn't work. That's not to say that there aren't some useful general principles, some patterns that are more likely to work for you. But at the end of the day it's your health; take the time to figure out what will work for you.

To err is human -- to blame it on a computer is even more so.

Working...