This is probably the best comment in the whole thread. In fact, you can't get "rich" unless you're a founder in a startup. (And no, this isn't sour grapes! I've made money in Silicon Valley, and continue to work at age 53 in a new startup.)
96 karma · joined August 13, 2015
Didn't get it right.
(See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buffalo_buffalo_Buffalo_buffal... )
Did better on "Colorless green ideas sleep furiously."
Most of the posts I saw were responses to fat-acceptance bloggers and their postings on their blogs. Obviously these blogs were created to foster discussion and that was happening. When the discussion wasn't positive, they got upset.
Obviously, it's a private website and they can do what they want with it. But it never was a place for "free speech." If you didn't go along with Reddit groupthink (which is an odd mix of socialism "college should be free" "Koch Brothers are Evil" and libertarianism "Go Uber!" "Open Access to the Internet") you would be quickly down voted away.
C'mon now, folks.
On the opposing side were battered women's advocacy groups arguing that Caller ID would make it impossible for a woman to hide her location from her tormentor.
See http://www.nytimes.com/1993/03/15/nyregion/popularity-of-cal... for a general discussion about this.
the most vehement opposition has come from advocates for battered women and other victims whose safety might depend on being able to call help lines or domestic-violence shelters anonymously. One Caller I.D. option lists numbers for calls that have been made as well as for calls received; thus an abusive husband, for example, could tell if his wife had called for help. And if such a victim has left home, Caller I.D. might help the abuser track her down if she or her children called. 'A Step Backward'
And among the groups that wanted it were, you guessed it, battered women's advocacy groups who argued that Caller ID would put an end to harassing phone calls!
Both sides gave tearful testimony to the California PUC.
People hate paying so much these days that they'll deal with poor quality information. We used to all pay for newspapers--why should they be "free" now just because there's no paper?
"Exercising regularly and reducing your body weight by about 5% could reduce your risk of getting diabetes by more than 50%."
They list four risk factors, but the BIGGEST risk factor is EATING TOO MUCH.
Why? Because the majority of people with Type II Diabetes (not all) could cure themselves just by eating less! Instead they put a burden on our health care system so they can maintain their habit.
A person living with HIV/AIDS doesn't have the ability to cure himself with a no-cost option. There's a huge difference there.
I think Obesity Induced diabetes should have a different name, like "Gluttony Glucose Syndrome".
I think they have some debugging to do.
(To you non-computer programmers, that means "Not a Number")
The response I got was:
"Do you think you belong to the young or old? You are the NaN person alive on the planet. This means that you are older than % of the world's population and older than 80% of all people in Israel."
What did he do to recreate Xerox PARC's "magic" while at these places?
"Racial prejudice of the sort that Jews faced may or may not be part of the problem, but affirmative action certainly is. Top universities tend to admit blacks and Hispanics with lower scores because of their history of disadvantage; and once the legacies, the sports stars, the politically well-connected and the rich people likely to donate new buildings (few of whom tend to be Asian) have been allotted their places, the number for people who are just high achievers is limited. Since the Ivies will not stop giving places to the privileged, because their finances depend on the generosity of the rich, the argument homes in on affirmative action."
The Truth, which is hard to swallow for some people, is well summarized in the book "The Bell Curve." Fact is, in a pure meritocracy, some groups of people ("races") would be represented more than others. And its impossible to face this fact in America without getting shouted down.
Where performance mattered we always used the commercial, proprietary, Intel compilers and/or the Microsoft compilers.
In a study of people who claimed to be "diet resistant" (some of whom were taking medication based on what they reported to their doctors) it had been determined that each and every one of them were underreporting their calorie intake and overreporting their exercise to the doctors.
Here's the study (PDF)
http://www.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1056/NEJM199212313272701
It's been duplicated again and again.
The last paragraph says:
"In conclusion, all the obese subjects we studied who had a history of self-reported diet resistance had appropriate energy expenditure, but they misreported their actual food intake and physical activity."
It's sounds shocking to me, but people would rather lie to their doctors, and get medication they don't need, than count calories accurately.
And exercise just makes you hungry.
Fat people should eat less until they're a healthy weight (BMI of < 24.9). Then think about exercise.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JPEG_2000#Progressive_transmis...
And the Digital Cinema formats widely used today rely on this so a 2K or 4K stream can be extracted from the same file.
What's "new" about FLIF is the better lossless compression rate
FLIF claims it will beat the lossless compression ratio of JPEG 2000