This is so important. It's incredible the difference it makes to the difficulty of the exercise let alone the damage you prevent to your body.
What would be awesome to take this idea a step further and create a Kinect app (or perhaps some other related/similar tech) which could determine if you are executing the correct form and make suggestions about how to correct yourself. This could also be used to monitor your progress in getting more flexible (e.g. in yoga).
EDIT: Obviously, not applicable to this app, but the idea stands nevertheless
This is not always true. Certain diseases, e.g. PCOS (Poly Cystic Ovarian Syndrome) and (general) insulin resistance mean that eating X calories (assuming X is lower than the calories expended on exercise, and basal metabolic rate) will just make you extremely tired and unproductive. In these diseases, the body is unable to utilize the energy that you are consuming and unable to burn the energy you have stored already.
I'm not suggesting that all causes of obesity are related to a disease, but things are definitely not so cut and dry as expend more energy than you consume and you will lose weight. The body is an exceedingly complex system of chemical reactions which are fairly tightly regulated (see topics around MCA - Metabolic Control Analysis, to understand how systems of reactions don't behave intuitively). Changing one input variable does not always yield the result you are looking for when you simplify the entire human metabalome down to an equation of calories in, fat storage and calories out
I also dislike "howdy" (and "g'day"), but I wouldn't necessarily go to "grating". Depends on my mood.
I think the issue partially stems from the fact that the internet can be seen as culturally removed. So if I visit someone in the US I expect to encounter their culture, and I am prepared for it. Same for Australia. However, on the internet I expect something more culturally neutral like "hello".
But then again, maybe it's just that certain words/phrases/accents annoy certain people, and you can't please all the people all the time
In another thread somewhere, it was said that with Roslyn they are holding off on adding new language features as every item they add is another step from completing Roslyn. Once it's out the door, there will be another flurry of features added.
Having said that, I already hear people complaining about the pace of new .Net frameworks and language features being too fast. I think that the community seems to be split on whether to add new language features or not
I find it amusing that email spam is such an issue for people, but physical mail and SMS spam is not. At least in South Africa, I really can't find a way to report SMS spam so I just keep on receiving it. And who the hell would I have to speak to in order to stop receiving shit in my physical mailbox
That sounds awfully like a grid scheduler (think Sun Grid Engine, and its derivatives), which I greatly welcome: the market (for grid schedulers) is a bit barren at the moment after Sun's buyout.
What's the status on accessing other system resources from containers (e.g. GPUs)? There was some work being done to enable this, but I'm not sure if the eventual solution was "run the container with less security so that it can access the cards", or if there was a more graceful approach
It's awesome that you stick to the moral high road despite the consequences for your own work. I think that the problem may become more pronounced as the length of a researcher's career grows.
Peer review should also be blind. Too often a famous name can get papers published that would not be published otherwise.
Fully agree, although that only solves the problem of pushing through papers based on researcher merit (not the topic of rejecting papers on the basis of conflict with your own agenda)
The problem is, is that the hypothesis is not always wrong. There are many examples in history where new hypotheses came along which go against the generally accepted dogma of the relevant field which scientists try to squash.
Think about it this way: if a hypothesis comes along which is counter to the work you've been doing for god knows how many years, are you really going to agree with it (publicly). This new idea threatens your career, so you do everything possible to get rid of it. The new system tries to keep around these new ideas so that they can be evaluated multiple times, as the people doing the evaluation change.
I'm constantly refactoring my code. Yes, not all of them are solution-wide changes, but it would be a huge drain on productivity to check in my code between each refactor. I need to be able to trust my IDE that it will refactor properly and not destroy my code
VC++ seems to have been given so little attention over the past years. I mean, even something like the new project wizard (which IIRC was due to be replaced when VS 2008 was around) is still untouched and completely different to the managed wizard. Maybe they've been too busy with C++11 feature implementation to actually improve the experience (and before that I imagine that .Net stole a lot of their resources). Of course now with C++14, they've got more work to do, so I'm not sure when we'll ever see significant improvements. It makes me sad, because being a C# dev, VS is very familiar, and to get a similar experience on the odd occasion I do write native code would be awesome!
Do you know any further details on his departure from StackExchange? I saw this message on his profile:
> I do not participate on this site any longer, except to respond to comments regarding my own text, if that text is unavailable in another form. I do not accept the political moderation atmosphere here, it is not compatible with open science.
It seemed like he really enjoyed helping people on the site, and there's nothing (left) on meta to show that the situation for him was deteriorating
I use Bootstrap exclusively, but I've played with Foundation (back on version 3). But honestly, I can't see what the difference in the frameworks are. Do you have a reference comparing them so that I could see what I'm missing?
Boost really should have been modular from the start. The way the docs are laid out almost implies they are modular, but then you have to pull in this massive codebase when all you want is smart pointers. I'm a big fan of Boost, and I'm glad to see them do this.
I do agree with you about the overlap. I've had the same issues in the past, but to be honest I think it's just a matter of getting to know the different sites and achieving an intuitive feel for where questions should go. It may not be perfect, and you may get blow-back if you post in the wrong site, but then learn from that and move on. As programmers, we should be used to failing when we try something, but we don't give up and abandon what we're doing: we try again until we succeed. And if that comes off a bit stoic (for programmers, and non-programmers alike) then I think that the person may need to readjust their ideas of what SO/SE is. It's a collection of random strangers who have been interacting for a period of time and built up certain social conventions which they start to expect people to conform to. Just as in real life you don't go up to a group of people and expect them to be perfectly willing to accept you no matter how you behave (good or bad). Yes, the separation is bad. Yes in the SO/SE case, it could maybe be improved, but generally there is always going to be overlap. With the advent of area51 it seems people really want to specialize the SE sites, which makes the problem worse: but that is what the community seems to want. I think that in order to fully solve the problem, there should only be one SE site, and everything could be separated appropriately by tags
Not sure how much it meets your needs (I know it does on 1 and 5, but probably not on 2) but have you considered Windows Azure? They have managed Linux instances with git deployment and a great web interface.
Thank you very much for this explination. I need some time to go through the details and subtleties of what you are saying, but it appears to be a great example of some of the shortcomings of C# compared to Scala.
To be fair, those appear to be pages which list existing packages, which is not what I was commenting on in my OP. However, I would suggest one of the closest equivalents would be nuget[1]. I think that the history of the languages should be mentioned: Ruby 1.0 was released in 1996[2], while the beta of .Net was only released in 2000, and 1.0 only in 2002[3]. Thus one could perhaps say (maybe unfairly, but nevertheless) that Ruby has had more time for OSS projects to develop. I"m not saying that that is the reason for the abundance of Ruby projects on Github, but I don't believe that the relative lack of .Net projects on Github implies that the needs of a .Net developer is not met by the current OSS offerings.
I agree with you on the functional style. C#'s LINQ solves this problem quite well, although they named them differently (map -> select, filter -> where, reduce -> Aggregate). I've seen a number of people laud C# for being functional-ish because of such features.
Why is it so hard to keep your data structures immutable in C# or Java? C# (my primary language) has parallel collections as of .Net 4.0 and with .Net 4.5 you have the async keyword support on top of the TPL. Could you elaborate on the differences between Scala and C# which make Sala more preferable for you? I'm not trying to start a war on C# vs Scala, I'm genuinely interested in the differences (I enjoy learning new languages, but for the right reasons)
I'm more and more confused by everyone that bashes the MS stack because it doesn't have the OSS community that the other stacks do. I'd really love to hear what OSS projects there are for the Python/Ruby/JVM/etc languages which don't have equivalents for .Net. Maybe I'm doing something wrong, but my experience on .Net has always been such that I can find a project to meet my needs. Sure my target OS is Windows, so the OS interop is not an issue for me, but for my day to day needs, there is always a solution to be found in the .Net OSS community.
One great feature of it is that it puts a start bar on every monitor (not just your primary monitor) which makes switching between programs much easier. For some reason though they decided not to put the task area (which has the clock, etc.) on each start bar though, only the primary monitor.