eawmp1
Apr 23, 03:36 PM
In general, the staff at most retail and restaurant chains are taught to notify the authorities and not get involved. Violating this policy can and will get you fired at best, or killed at worst.
KnightWRX
Dec 30, 10:43 PM
Under normal circumstances, you're more or less right.
No, I'm 100% right. Weight control is about calories. End of story. Calories in < Calories out and you lose weight. Opposite and you gain weight. There's no more or less here, that is the very basic premise. You want to discuss specifics that affect calories in/calories out, but that's flawed. Teach people the base first, and let them balance themselves out. You can very easily test your metabolic rate.
However, many supersize people have participated in crash diets, drugs and other questionable regimens over the years in search of quick-fix thinness. Doing so can, after a while, sabotage the body's normal metabolic rate and endocrine output, making it much harder for these people to find the balance in their caloric equation without depriving themselves of needed micronutrients (vitamins, minerals).
So you're saying these people have abnormally low "Calories out". It still comes down to that very simple equation. These people first have to fix their calories out, get their metabolism back straight, then they can fix their calories in.
It is that easy to lose weight. People don't know this very simple and basic concept, they think "Fat/Sugar" has to do with weight, which is completely false. "Low Saturated Fat!" on a box of cookies means squat if the cookies are 170 calories for 3 vs 180 calories for 3 of the same cookies with normal saturated fat. You still can't eat the whole box in one sitting and think "hey, it's low fat, I can't gain weight from this".
You'd be surprised how many people think this way.
I don't have a dog in this fight, but the question that runs through my mind is: if it's so easy, why do people struggle with it? Why are there entire industries built around people that struggle with losing weight on their own?
People struggle because like someone pointed out, they lack willpower and I'll add that they lack education. Calorie control is the only way to lose weight. There's seriously no other way, since weight is based off of calories and calories alone. To lose weight, you need a calorie deficiency. To be more precise, 3500 calories = 1 lbs, each way. So you need to create a calorie deficiency of 3500 calories before you lose 1 lbs. My metabolic rate is around 1740, that's what I burn each day without lifting a finger. Add in my normal routine, and I'm around the magic 2000 calorie diet. Let's not add in my gym routine. So to lose 1 lbs in 7 days, I need to go on a 1500 calorie diet per day. That's going to give me a deficiency of 500 per day, times 7 days, 1 lbs lost.
There's entire industries because they profit from it. Some people like to buy "instant" solutions. 1 lbs in 7 days ? Bah humbug, too long, I have 100 to lose! There's no instant solutions to weight loss, quite the contrary, the entire weight loss industry makes money by keeping people fat and coming back for miracle cures. Their proposed plans of "1 shake/bar for breakfeast, same for lunch and a balanced diner" is awful. First, it should be the opposite, a good breakfeast and then their bars/shakes for lunch and diner. Breakfeast is where you get your day's energy. Second, that's not calorie control since it doesn't explain that it is trying to create a calorie deficit. So people just still overeat, they compensate the calories they didn't eat at breakfeast/lunch with a huge "balanced" diner.
I'm going to just assume you are young and have time on your hands. Because when I was young and had time staying trim was quite easy., Let's talk when you're in your 30's and are a busy professional :rolleyes:
I'm 32, work 35 hours per week in IT (sitting down on my ass), am on call with tons of pages coming in once every 2 weeks. I have a girlfriend, a mortgage and a dog.
Again, staying trim has nothing to do with having time or being busy or not. If you spend less calories, eat less calories. Balance your calories in to your calories out and you'll stay trim. Sure it means doing a bit more research into what you're eating, but that's not impossible. It also means listening to your body. Feeling "stuffed" means you overate. You should never feel full or stuffed. A donut is not faster to mow down than an Apple. It's not more filling either. It's tons more calories though.
You made an assumption about me and you were wrong. You should look at yourself and what you are or aren't doing that is making you fat, not make up excuses.
look. I'm not trying to make excuses. I'm not THAT out of shape. I do bikram yoga 4 times per week and walk a lot. I just can't be as extensive about it as I was in my youthful years. I'm very healthy but I do need to drop 20ish lbs. per doctors orders. I've completely cut out any sugar drinks other than water and a few organic smoothies and an occaional glass of wine here and there. But at my age and with my busy schedule it's just not as easy as it was when I was 25. Not an excuse, just a simple fact.
But again, it's just because you don't understand your caloric need for a day and you either overeat or eat just the right amount to maintain your weight. You don't even need to exercise to create a calorie deficiency. I think you're the perfect example of what I'm talking about, you don't understand the very basic concept, which has nothing to do with time spent, but rather food ingested.
People need to get it out of their heads that it is about exercise. It's 10% working out, 90% food. Get your nutrition right and you won't need to exercise a day in your life. If you want to get fit however, make sure to balance your nutrition around your added caloric need to not drop weight too fast or at all if your goal is maintaining.
No, I'm 100% right. Weight control is about calories. End of story. Calories in < Calories out and you lose weight. Opposite and you gain weight. There's no more or less here, that is the very basic premise. You want to discuss specifics that affect calories in/calories out, but that's flawed. Teach people the base first, and let them balance themselves out. You can very easily test your metabolic rate.
However, many supersize people have participated in crash diets, drugs and other questionable regimens over the years in search of quick-fix thinness. Doing so can, after a while, sabotage the body's normal metabolic rate and endocrine output, making it much harder for these people to find the balance in their caloric equation without depriving themselves of needed micronutrients (vitamins, minerals).
So you're saying these people have abnormally low "Calories out". It still comes down to that very simple equation. These people first have to fix their calories out, get their metabolism back straight, then they can fix their calories in.
It is that easy to lose weight. People don't know this very simple and basic concept, they think "Fat/Sugar" has to do with weight, which is completely false. "Low Saturated Fat!" on a box of cookies means squat if the cookies are 170 calories for 3 vs 180 calories for 3 of the same cookies with normal saturated fat. You still can't eat the whole box in one sitting and think "hey, it's low fat, I can't gain weight from this".
You'd be surprised how many people think this way.
I don't have a dog in this fight, but the question that runs through my mind is: if it's so easy, why do people struggle with it? Why are there entire industries built around people that struggle with losing weight on their own?
People struggle because like someone pointed out, they lack willpower and I'll add that they lack education. Calorie control is the only way to lose weight. There's seriously no other way, since weight is based off of calories and calories alone. To lose weight, you need a calorie deficiency. To be more precise, 3500 calories = 1 lbs, each way. So you need to create a calorie deficiency of 3500 calories before you lose 1 lbs. My metabolic rate is around 1740, that's what I burn each day without lifting a finger. Add in my normal routine, and I'm around the magic 2000 calorie diet. Let's not add in my gym routine. So to lose 1 lbs in 7 days, I need to go on a 1500 calorie diet per day. That's going to give me a deficiency of 500 per day, times 7 days, 1 lbs lost.
There's entire industries because they profit from it. Some people like to buy "instant" solutions. 1 lbs in 7 days ? Bah humbug, too long, I have 100 to lose! There's no instant solutions to weight loss, quite the contrary, the entire weight loss industry makes money by keeping people fat and coming back for miracle cures. Their proposed plans of "1 shake/bar for breakfeast, same for lunch and a balanced diner" is awful. First, it should be the opposite, a good breakfeast and then their bars/shakes for lunch and diner. Breakfeast is where you get your day's energy. Second, that's not calorie control since it doesn't explain that it is trying to create a calorie deficit. So people just still overeat, they compensate the calories they didn't eat at breakfeast/lunch with a huge "balanced" diner.
I'm going to just assume you are young and have time on your hands. Because when I was young and had time staying trim was quite easy., Let's talk when you're in your 30's and are a busy professional :rolleyes:
I'm 32, work 35 hours per week in IT (sitting down on my ass), am on call with tons of pages coming in once every 2 weeks. I have a girlfriend, a mortgage and a dog.
Again, staying trim has nothing to do with having time or being busy or not. If you spend less calories, eat less calories. Balance your calories in to your calories out and you'll stay trim. Sure it means doing a bit more research into what you're eating, but that's not impossible. It also means listening to your body. Feeling "stuffed" means you overate. You should never feel full or stuffed. A donut is not faster to mow down than an Apple. It's not more filling either. It's tons more calories though.
You made an assumption about me and you were wrong. You should look at yourself and what you are or aren't doing that is making you fat, not make up excuses.
look. I'm not trying to make excuses. I'm not THAT out of shape. I do bikram yoga 4 times per week and walk a lot. I just can't be as extensive about it as I was in my youthful years. I'm very healthy but I do need to drop 20ish lbs. per doctors orders. I've completely cut out any sugar drinks other than water and a few organic smoothies and an occaional glass of wine here and there. But at my age and with my busy schedule it's just not as easy as it was when I was 25. Not an excuse, just a simple fact.
But again, it's just because you don't understand your caloric need for a day and you either overeat or eat just the right amount to maintain your weight. You don't even need to exercise to create a calorie deficiency. I think you're the perfect example of what I'm talking about, you don't understand the very basic concept, which has nothing to do with time spent, but rather food ingested.
People need to get it out of their heads that it is about exercise. It's 10% working out, 90% food. Get your nutrition right and you won't need to exercise a day in your life. If you want to get fit however, make sure to balance your nutrition around your added caloric need to not drop weight too fast or at all if your goal is maintaining.
rdrr
Oct 23, 03:53 PM
This is actually an incorrect report that Microsoft has tried to correct, but it keeps getting reported.
http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=157
I know we jump all over MS for spreading FUD... We shouldn't do the same.
http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=157
I know we jump all over MS for spreading FUD... We shouldn't do the same.
Demoman
Jul 10, 12:15 PM
At $79 a year it will probably be 5 years before the program moves to a commonly useful level where it may have the ability to replace MS Office. The very casual Word Processor user will not have to wait very long, maybe Pages 3 or Pages 4. With the 5 X $79 = $395 we move into the price range of the non-educational price of MS Office. But for the heavy Office user, 5 years may not be long enough.
Apple would used to calculate the Real Total Cost of Ownership for Macs. They would include after purchase service & support costs. We need to do the same for iWork. iWork is not a simple $79 program useless you wait for the version you want, purchase it & then add no updates that have a purchase price. If you want a slimmed down program purchase now, but have few features to give few benefits. If you want a more complete program just wait for the 5th or 6th upgrade. But this way you have no program to use for another 2 1/2 to 3 1/2 years. Anything else requires multiplying the $79 by by a 2, 4, 5 or even larger number to get the true cost of iWork.
Bill the TaxMan
I use pages exclusively as do all of the workers who are testing Apple at my business. After a short learning curve, everyone likes it and it is more than capable right now. You are really coming off as an Apple ball-buster. All I read from you is negative Apple. Are you collecting your checks from Redmond???
Apple would used to calculate the Real Total Cost of Ownership for Macs. They would include after purchase service & support costs. We need to do the same for iWork. iWork is not a simple $79 program useless you wait for the version you want, purchase it & then add no updates that have a purchase price. If you want a slimmed down program purchase now, but have few features to give few benefits. If you want a more complete program just wait for the 5th or 6th upgrade. But this way you have no program to use for another 2 1/2 to 3 1/2 years. Anything else requires multiplying the $79 by by a 2, 4, 5 or even larger number to get the true cost of iWork.
Bill the TaxMan
I use pages exclusively as do all of the workers who are testing Apple at my business. After a short learning curve, everyone likes it and it is more than capable right now. You are really coming off as an Apple ball-buster. All I read from you is negative Apple. Are you collecting your checks from Redmond???
more...
acidfast7
May 3, 07:42 AM
Excellent news!
I'm looking to spend some grant money and 4 x 27" iMacs and a couple 2 TB Time Capsules sounds like a great idea!
I'm looking to spend some grant money and 4 x 27" iMacs and a couple 2 TB Time Capsules sounds like a great idea!
MattyMac
Jul 25, 09:45 AM
I payed more than that for my Apple BT mouse a few days ago:mad: :rolleyes: :(
Take it back!
Take it back!
more...
IJ Reilly
Jan 28, 01:14 PM
1) Not really. The current quarter beat expectations. The worry is about the coming quarter.
2) iPod sales are not dropping. Unit growth rate was lower.
3) MacWorld announcements really don't matter.
4) Define spectacular.
5) Lower than who expected?
6) The China market issue is unresolved.
7) iTunes is not a major profit center for Apple.
8) Possibly, but see above.
9) Possibly, but see above. And this is also old news, which did not hurt the share price when it came out.
10) Apple's margins were way up in the quarter.
11) This is true.
Bottom line: It's not always possible to rationally explain why the market does what it does on a short-term basis.
2) iPod sales are not dropping. Unit growth rate was lower.
3) MacWorld announcements really don't matter.
4) Define spectacular.
5) Lower than who expected?
6) The China market issue is unresolved.
7) iTunes is not a major profit center for Apple.
8) Possibly, but see above.
9) Possibly, but see above. And this is also old news, which did not hurt the share price when it came out.
10) Apple's margins were way up in the quarter.
11) This is true.
Bottom line: It's not always possible to rationally explain why the market does what it does on a short-term basis.
Plutonius
Apr 26, 04:05 PM
Ah, a last minute vote by Aggie. It looks like he might not have purposely bolded his original vote. Add his name to the list for tomorrow.
more...
Mystikal
Mar 17, 11:29 AM
Spectrum only got 12 units today, 6 16gb black wifi and 6 32gb black wifi - I got the 12th voucher - for a 16gb black wifi!
Congrats! Did anyone else get lucky?
Congrats! Did anyone else get lucky?
appleguy123
Apr 28, 01:09 PM
Looks like I had the wolf roles backwards. Oh well. I'll be watching to see if my prediction holds up. :D
more...
ericinboston
Apr 11, 02:39 PM
This couldn't be further from the truth. TB is so much more versatile than USB can really ever be with tons more speed
I've seen what TB can do and it's great. But what I'm saying is that it will be HARD for TB to step into a USB-dominated computer industry and just kill USB altogether from all angles. Will TB be faster than USB 3.0?...in real world use by 90% of the consumers/prosumers out there? Maybe. Maybe not. It's like asking Bluray to come in and just dominate the DVD market...it's been trying and 3+ years BluRay is doing well, but the average Joe understands he needs to re-purchase all this movies as well as purchase a hi-def tv and stereo receiver to take advantage of all the features of Bluray (I love Bluray, by the way). It's time, money, and not everyone sees the value or HAS A NEED for that value.
Will people throw out all their USB devices and twiddle their thumbs waiting for TB devices other than hard drives (cameras, printers, video cams, keyboards, mice, flash keys,)? No. Of course not.
Speed vs. Speed is 1 argument...versatility is another. But again, what I'm really saying is to look around you and ask yourself if the world is just going to dump USB technology for TB? Nope. TB will likely coincide with USB 3.0 just like eSATA and Firewire.
We'll see in a few years where we are.
I've seen what TB can do and it's great. But what I'm saying is that it will be HARD for TB to step into a USB-dominated computer industry and just kill USB altogether from all angles. Will TB be faster than USB 3.0?...in real world use by 90% of the consumers/prosumers out there? Maybe. Maybe not. It's like asking Bluray to come in and just dominate the DVD market...it's been trying and 3+ years BluRay is doing well, but the average Joe understands he needs to re-purchase all this movies as well as purchase a hi-def tv and stereo receiver to take advantage of all the features of Bluray (I love Bluray, by the way). It's time, money, and not everyone sees the value or HAS A NEED for that value.
Will people throw out all their USB devices and twiddle their thumbs waiting for TB devices other than hard drives (cameras, printers, video cams, keyboards, mice, flash keys,)? No. Of course not.
Speed vs. Speed is 1 argument...versatility is another. But again, what I'm really saying is to look around you and ask yourself if the world is just going to dump USB technology for TB? Nope. TB will likely coincide with USB 3.0 just like eSATA and Firewire.
We'll see in a few years where we are.
ThugZilla
Apr 24, 10:26 AM
I was planning to replace my Vibant on Tmobile with a Samsung Galaxy SII, but the iPhone will certainly change my mind.
more...
oldwatery
Mar 31, 08:03 PM
I find most of the comments puerile or insane--over reacting with disdain or glee--while the major concern should be the function. I still find iCal a little limited and annoyingly so in terms of notes attached to daily functions.
Who gives a crap how it is decorated! Make the thing work better and it will work better, and that's what matters to real people who need real organization within their lives.
Obviously loads of people do give a crap how it looks...so what are we chopped liver?
Real people indeed...:p
Who gives a crap how it is decorated! Make the thing work better and it will work better, and that's what matters to real people who need real organization within their lives.
Obviously loads of people do give a crap how it looks...so what are we chopped liver?
Real people indeed...:p
eawmp1
Mar 1, 12:11 PM
Hold the phone Lee, are you telling me there isn't going to be another "Hot Shots" sequal! I'm going to have to go lie down for a while. ;)
Hot Shots: Part Deux Deux
Is is just me, have Emilio and Martin been a bit quiet over this whole fiasco?
Hot Shots: Part Deux Deux
Is is just me, have Emilio and Martin been a bit quiet over this whole fiasco?
more...
Chase R
Nov 8, 07:18 PM
This downhill longboard deck (Landyachtz Evo):
http://www.xtreme-adrenaline.com/itemimages/Landyachtz-Evo-Complete1.jpg
Hello 50MPH+ :D
http://www.xtreme-adrenaline.com/itemimages/Landyachtz-Evo-Complete1.jpg
Hello 50MPH+ :D
AndroidfoLife
Apr 23, 08:55 PM
Indeed, there have been reports saying that the return rate of the Thunderbolt is quite high due to this very issue.
I was considering going over to verizon for it but ill just stay on Tmo and get the Samsung galaxy s2
I was considering going over to verizon for it but ill just stay on Tmo and get the Samsung galaxy s2
more...
nishioka
Apr 28, 04:19 PM
I LOLed. Episode was a bit too silly IMO.
A bit?? :D
A bit?? :D
dXTC
Dec 29, 02:08 PM
I'm always amazed by the amount of abuse the human body can withstand. How is she not already dead? How is it that her bones don't break under the load? Astonishing, really.
Like most people her size, the amount of time she stands is very limited indeed. When out and about, she's scooter-bound. Her husband drives her most places.
Another plus-size adult model, the 600-ish "Goddess Patty" (the one that smothered Wee Man in the "Magic Trick" clip in Jackass 2), did a few "daily life" vids that made it to DailyMotion. One such DailyMotion clip depicted her walking from her bathroom to her living room couch-- maybe 5-7 meters (15-22 feet), and she was totally out of breath afterward.
Like most people her size, the amount of time she stands is very limited indeed. When out and about, she's scooter-bound. Her husband drives her most places.
Another plus-size adult model, the 600-ish "Goddess Patty" (the one that smothered Wee Man in the "Magic Trick" clip in Jackass 2), did a few "daily life" vids that made it to DailyMotion. One such DailyMotion clip depicted her walking from her bathroom to her living room couch-- maybe 5-7 meters (15-22 feet), and she was totally out of breath afterward.
Bern
Jul 10, 03:00 PM
Not for what I'm doing. Pages strikes me as something for newsletters, not writing well-researched articles and novels.
Not true :rolleyes:
I used Pages to do a college term paper which was over 40 pages long. My lecturer commented it was the best presented he had seen for years.
Perhaps the issue people are having with Pages is that it looks too easy compared to Word and that confuses them. You really do need to use Pages as a Word replacement to appreciate how good is actually is.
iWork '07 will be great.
Not true :rolleyes:
I used Pages to do a college term paper which was over 40 pages long. My lecturer commented it was the best presented he had seen for years.
Perhaps the issue people are having with Pages is that it looks too easy compared to Word and that confuses them. You really do need to use Pages as a Word replacement to appreciate how good is actually is.
iWork '07 will be great.
APPLENEWBIE
Apr 22, 05:43 PM
I have an iPod Touch and I find it difficult to hold on to the damn thing without a case. The thing might as well be a fish! A phone shaped like the illustration would be an ergonomic disaster, in my opinion.
chrmjenkins
Apr 28, 11:10 PM
Just picked up a white one for the wife. I can confirm the very slightly fatter profile just like everyone else.
NT1440
May 1, 11:41 PM
What, so he wasn't important? What about the president?
Disregarding the missed point...
Was important. The past tense matters. Other than giving those who look at the world with a revenge-at-all-costs is a good thing point of view something to chant loudly for, what has this changed?
If anything this will just escalate our wars, from both sides.
Disregarding the missed point...
Was important. The past tense matters. Other than giving those who look at the world with a revenge-at-all-costs is a good thing point of view something to chant loudly for, what has this changed?
If anything this will just escalate our wars, from both sides.
MacVault
Oct 24, 08:08 AM
Here comes the moaning.......... ;)
Yea... WHERE THE [censored] ARE THE MACBOOKS?! I want a Core 2 Duo MacBook, not MacBook Pro :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:
Yea... WHERE THE [censored] ARE THE MACBOOKS?! I want a Core 2 Duo MacBook, not MacBook Pro :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:
840quadra
Dec 3, 03:56 PM
So, we are going to see even more of this message board trolling and FUD. There are many obvious 'newbie' troll posts. But, I am also seeing some 'moles' trolling too. Some of them showed up many months ago and are now regulars. What they are doing is providing newbie support.
The newbie comes on with a troll post, and bam, he gets a regular, or two to give legitimacy to the disinformation. The thread is off and running. Another tactic I notice is the thread subject troll. The subject line is written to be very negative, but then the first post is very much toned down, sometimes even apologetic, "Sorry for venting, I know this is rare...", that type of stuff. The damage is done and no one is aware it was a disinformation attack.
The stakes are high and MS has been found guilty in court of doing the things I am describing. This is not the ranting of a paranoid. I happen to know a considerable amount about disinformation and the tactics involved. With a little work, you can see the same things. Look at the post history for those making anti-Apple posts. The critical eye can discern the inconsistencies in what they write.
I can understand the feelings behind what you are saying, and do appreciate that point of view. I however however, am not sure that I can really see anyone doing hopeless FUD spreading on this particular thread. You seem to be (like a few others) concerned that those of us who have security concerns, have given up on Apple, and want to work with these 3rd party groups to provide us with security solutions. I don't see many people on this thread with that attitude, I see concerned users like myself, that want to see that Apple heads up security themselves.
To me the poll and question "After the Month of Kernel Bugs, are you concerned about Mac OS X security?" was interpreted by me as ..
Yes I am concerned about Mac OS X security. Meaning, I am concerned about my operating system security in general.
For whatever reason, I believe that anyone that voted Yes, is being interpreted by some people as it meaning "Yes I am concerned about Mac OS X security, as it is a hopelessly unsecured operating system, god save us, the world is going to end!".
Perhaps a few of the people who said yes may think that, but don't assume all of us are like that! Please feel free to look into my post history, not that it is any of your business anyway. You will find that I am a true Apple and Mac fan through and through!
The newbie comes on with a troll post, and bam, he gets a regular, or two to give legitimacy to the disinformation. The thread is off and running. Another tactic I notice is the thread subject troll. The subject line is written to be very negative, but then the first post is very much toned down, sometimes even apologetic, "Sorry for venting, I know this is rare...", that type of stuff. The damage is done and no one is aware it was a disinformation attack.
The stakes are high and MS has been found guilty in court of doing the things I am describing. This is not the ranting of a paranoid. I happen to know a considerable amount about disinformation and the tactics involved. With a little work, you can see the same things. Look at the post history for those making anti-Apple posts. The critical eye can discern the inconsistencies in what they write.
I can understand the feelings behind what you are saying, and do appreciate that point of view. I however however, am not sure that I can really see anyone doing hopeless FUD spreading on this particular thread. You seem to be (like a few others) concerned that those of us who have security concerns, have given up on Apple, and want to work with these 3rd party groups to provide us with security solutions. I don't see many people on this thread with that attitude, I see concerned users like myself, that want to see that Apple heads up security themselves.
To me the poll and question "After the Month of Kernel Bugs, are you concerned about Mac OS X security?" was interpreted by me as ..
Yes I am concerned about Mac OS X security. Meaning, I am concerned about my operating system security in general.
For whatever reason, I believe that anyone that voted Yes, is being interpreted by some people as it meaning "Yes I am concerned about Mac OS X security, as it is a hopelessly unsecured operating system, god save us, the world is going to end!".
Perhaps a few of the people who said yes may think that, but don't assume all of us are like that! Please feel free to look into my post history, not that it is any of your business anyway. You will find that I am a true Apple and Mac fan through and through!
No comments:
Post a Comment