Come off it. Bacon tastes great, and has great nutritional value. Same with cheese, chicken, steak, fish, fried onions, tomatoes, bananas, peanuts and other nuts, pizza, hamburgers, meatloaf, etc. It's all in the preparation. (Except for organs. Liver tastes like something that spent a lifetime filtering out crap for a reason, kidneys taste like they've been marinated in piss, etc).
Raw sugar by itself? Not so much. See how many tablespoons you can eat of plain sugar by itself. It becomes gross reqlly quickly.
Also, how is this news? "researchers note the increasing uptake of chemically processed foods, such as instant noodles and pasta, and the addition of sugar, pastry, and bread to their diets" increases obesity. No shit sherlock.
Mostly for stupid people.
Because bigger numbers are better! Only a loser will use a 2:1 screen. Real men? they have a 10,000,000:5,000,000 ratio screen!
and it has a 330,000 uAh battery! DEAR GOD ITS HUGE! MOAR POWER!
And all you thinkers can STFU! stop your freedom hating education and knowlege from getting in the way of FREEDOM!
For voting in a guy that found some of the dumbest human beings on the planet to staff important positions.
Trump himself wont do the damage, The morally bankrupt 89IQ rich idiots he appointed will.
My father was a MENSA member in the '70s. Apparently they had a lot of parties back then with strippers. That's why he went.
So your father had to pay $60 a year for a MENSA membership just to go to parties with (paid) strippers? Do you realize just how lame that sounds? Back in the 70s most of us who were adults then were going to parties with real sex with other participants, not strippers. We had a ski resort that the college rented over the christmas/new years holiday, that would put a student in charge (me at the time). We called it "The Last Resort." Student couples who wanted to get it on could stay there overnight - all it took was your student ID.
Hell of a lot more fun than a MENSA party with strippers. Your old man proves the point that MENSA is for lamers.
Donald Trump is rich and President of the United States, and you're not. Go figure.
Not from his own efforts. He got his old man's money and influence to start. And even then, he went bankrupt 6 (not 4) times. Same as many spoiled man-chilldren who never had to start from the bottom. And now he's bringing that talent to bankrupt businesses to government. His behavior has all the markings of a sociopathic con man mixed with the maturity of a 13-year-old.
I think we were thrown off point by AC, who doesn't seem to grasp that physical systems can be described in alternative reference frames.
I think he is trying to say that there is no such thing as a geostationary orbit, because satellites in that orbit are actually tracing out a circular (or even more pedantically, spiral) path.
I believe the responder was trying to point out, using the example of a rocket ship travelling to geosynchronous orbit, that "stationary" is a kind trick of perspective when viewed from the frame of fixed stars.
Of course in the rotating frame of where we happen to be sitting on the Earth geostationary satellites are indeed actually stationary.
geosynchronous satellites: when the sun circulates over the north pole and it causes the satellite to exhibit the figure 8 orbit
geostationary : are fixed (fiction) stations , allegedly ground based
That is the most garbled explanation I've ever heard of geosynchronous orbits.
A geosynchronous orbit is one with a period that exactly matches the Earth's rate of rotation.
Geostationary orbits are a special case of geosynchronous orbits where the angle inclination of the orbit to the Earth's equator is zero.
So: a satellite in a geosynchronous orbit that is also geostationary appears to continually hover 22,236 miles above some point on the Earth's equator. If it is in a geosynchronous orbit that is not geostationary, it will appear from the earth to drift north and south of the celestial equator, tracing a figure 8 against the background stars over the course of one Earth rotation.
Of course in both cases the satellite would actually be following an elliptical (in fact almost perfectly circular) path around the Earth. The "stationary" or "figure 8" thing is simply a trick of perspective -- the way car in the next lane traveling at the same speed appears not to be moving.
Yeah, most of you knew all that. But insofar as there's an explanation here, it oughtn't be gibberish.
But do you think that's a good thing, or a bad thing?
People can adapt to just about anything. If you live in a ditch, then a shack feels like a mansion. If the people around you live in mansions, a perfectly serviceable house seems like a shack.
It's the Red Queen's race:
"Now, here, you see, it takes all the running you can do, to keep in the same place. If you want to get somewhere else, you must run at least twice as fast as that!"
And once you've adapted to running twice as fast, you'll have to run twice as fast yet again to feel like you're progressing.
That's why I say the most important thing in your profession, once you have achieved enough income to live modestly and set a little aside for the future, is to find work that is in itself rewarding.
That's not the point. IT's not whether any particular fed action is advisable or inadvisable. It's that the printing money analogy is broken.
What are you going to do when those super-smart sneakers get hacked and decide you should go somewhere else? Or the battery catches fire and they won't untie themselves? Or you become the target of thieves because if you can afford to waste money on intelligent sneakers (because you obviusly have more money than brains) what other swag can they snag off you? Or if someone SWATs your sneakers? You're walking along and your sneakers are broadcasting alerts to everyone in the area that you're a wanted child molester?
On second thought, I can't wait until our idiot overlords start going around with their intelligent sneakers.
Same as if you scrape the bottom of the gene pool, you can easily conceive of "computers exceeding human intelligence" today, never mind 3 decades from now. We can start with the the guy quoted in the summary, Masayoshi Son, who doesn't understand the difference between computing power and intelligence.
/* Halley */ (Halley's comment.)