leekohler
Apr 27, 12:15 PM
It's called facts, not sure if you've ever come across this word before. I didn't particularly like what I saw, and milking the seizure was the right thing to do in order for these scumbags to go away. But it's just an observation that I and many have so why not say it?
Facts? You have no proof that she was faking a seizure- none whatsoever. If you want to talk facts, then speak about what you actually know. You have NO WAY to prove she was faking. What you're engaging in is speculation.
Facts? You have no proof that she was faking a seizure- none whatsoever. If you want to talk facts, then speak about what you actually know. You have NO WAY to prove she was faking. What you're engaging in is speculation.
chrmjenkins
Apr 23, 06:37 PM
The Verizon iPhone's radio actually supports the AWS 3G bands. This phone could be as simple as a Verizon iPhone with SIM and custom firmware. It's also possible the antenna bands are different too. Still, the radio wouldn't have to be something not in a shipping apple iPhone.
dXTC
Jan 12, 10:25 AM
...
Oh and I do have a hard time believing that she ate as much as that article claims, at least in one sitting. Her stomach would surely burst! :eek:
It's easy in terms of the physics behind it. Consume less than you burn, you lose weight. However, there's something psychological behind the urge to eat. In some cases it would be like telling an alcoholic that it's easy, just stop drinking. There are also some studies and theories which have pointed out that some people don't get the necessary signals to indicate that they are full. So it's simple but it's not. (if you know what I mean.)
Have you ever seen a "professional eating" contest? The human digestive system can do rather amazing things, especially if it's been conditioned over a period of years, which is definitely true in this woman's case. The "sitting" may be 2 to 3 hours, with a bathroom break so that she can make room in her colon for the "next wave", but yeah, it's possible, especially with light yet calorie-dense foods like snack cakes, and high-calorie drinks like Kool-Aid to wash it down/through.
Psychological factors? You betcha. Donna's admitted to being a feedee, and in the vast majority of feeder/feedee relationships, there's a codependence factor.
Oh and I do have a hard time believing that she ate as much as that article claims, at least in one sitting. Her stomach would surely burst! :eek:
It's easy in terms of the physics behind it. Consume less than you burn, you lose weight. However, there's something psychological behind the urge to eat. In some cases it would be like telling an alcoholic that it's easy, just stop drinking. There are also some studies and theories which have pointed out that some people don't get the necessary signals to indicate that they are full. So it's simple but it's not. (if you know what I mean.)
Have you ever seen a "professional eating" contest? The human digestive system can do rather amazing things, especially if it's been conditioned over a period of years, which is definitely true in this woman's case. The "sitting" may be 2 to 3 hours, with a bathroom break so that she can make room in her colon for the "next wave", but yeah, it's possible, especially with light yet calorie-dense foods like snack cakes, and high-calorie drinks like Kool-Aid to wash it down/through.
Psychological factors? You betcha. Donna's admitted to being a feedee, and in the vast majority of feeder/feedee relationships, there's a codependence factor.
fly75
Jan 30, 03:05 PM
Liberal banter = common sense and simple logic for the intelligent.... Too many people are so caught up in their lives that they forget the trauma of the past. History repeats itself and the market is like a roller coaster... remember the 1980's? Or even worse the 1930's.... Tech Stock is not going to hold. I am betting on Gold to hit at least 1500.00 in the next coming months and then upwards to the 2000.00 range.
I remember the Hunt brothers being pretty bullish on silver in the 80's.
Only cost them a few billion:eek:
I remember the Hunt brothers being pretty bullish on silver in the 80's.
Only cost them a few billion:eek:
more...
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.
know-it-all5
Jul 11, 04:00 PM
In all seriousness the photo shown looks like a microsoft type design. the truth is as much as i love all the ipods, apple is a little behind. there are loads of companies with products out there that out do the apple ipod gen5.
If you look at the photo of the microsoft player you can see that there are many companies that have come up with stuff almost identical. look at the creative zen for example. they are really similar in design.
I'd say to all the companies "watch out for apple", because apple mmust have something big up their sleeve to compete in the longrun. A good track record won't save apple forever.
I want to add that i love my mini, my nano, and i intend to buy a next gen video when it comes out.
These comments are all proving one thing... Windows is bearly competing with the companies that are barely competing with apple. Apple will blow everyone away with upcoming ipods! YOU ALL JUST WAIT! IT WILL BE AMAZING!!!!!
If you look at the photo of the microsoft player you can see that there are many companies that have come up with stuff almost identical. look at the creative zen for example. they are really similar in design.
I'd say to all the companies "watch out for apple", because apple mmust have something big up their sleeve to compete in the longrun. A good track record won't save apple forever.
I want to add that i love my mini, my nano, and i intend to buy a next gen video when it comes out.
These comments are all proving one thing... Windows is bearly competing with the companies that are barely competing with apple. Apple will blow everyone away with upcoming ipods! YOU ALL JUST WAIT! IT WILL BE AMAZING!!!!!
more...
CmdrLaForge
Jul 28, 01:56 PM
Thats typical for M$ and thats why we hate them all....:mad:
mrblah
Jul 24, 11:49 PM
Is Apples Bluetooth tech anywhere near as completely useless as Logitech's bluetooth mouse tech?
I have a DiNovo bluetooth set and the mouse (suprisingly the most expensive mouse they sell) is almost criminally bad. If this represents the bluetooth signal as a whole for mouse movement then why in gods name is Apple making this? I cant even use my Logitech BT mouse because it only works normally for 10 minutes before it freaks out or just stops trying, I have to stick with RF from them (which is flawless).
I have a DiNovo bluetooth set and the mouse (suprisingly the most expensive mouse they sell) is almost criminally bad. If this represents the bluetooth signal as a whole for mouse movement then why in gods name is Apple making this? I cant even use my Logitech BT mouse because it only works normally for 10 minutes before it freaks out or just stops trying, I have to stick with RF from them (which is flawless).
more...
dba7dba
Apr 13, 03:25 PM
You might have inside sources at Apple, because you seem to be too sure that it will cost 2K and would only last for 2 - 3 years.
I remember people not wanting an iPad when the rumors broke out. Same thing.
So how much do you think the rumored Apple TV should cost to be wildly successful WHILE maintaining 50% (approx) profit margin?
I remember people not wanting an iPad when the rumors broke out. Same thing.
So how much do you think the rumored Apple TV should cost to be wildly successful WHILE maintaining 50% (approx) profit margin?
rovex
Apr 14, 02:13 AM
iPhone 5 is releasing in September, no question about it now
more...
swingerofbirch
Dec 1, 02:03 PM
I'll say it before, and I'll say it again, this is a critical time for Apple and it's no time to be an Apple apologist. It's time to hold Apple's feet to the fire. Being soft on them isn't helping them. It's just enabling them not to realize their full potential.
lbro
Apr 22, 03:41 PM
So is twelve enough players or do you guys want more?
more...
thisisahughes
Apr 23, 11:51 PM
I just seen a T-Mobile commercial where they threw an iPhone 4. :(
yoak
Jul 24, 04:52 PM
I have BT keyboard and mouse with my iMac and I love the tidyness of it. One cable that�s all. I have tried the MM in the shop and I thought it was nice to use, but from what I�ve read here it seems to be problems with the scroll ball. Guess my old mouse will do for now
more...
cloud 9
Dec 3, 10:12 AM
This is the summary from that page...
I looked over his code analysis and I agree with his conclusion about it not being possible to corrupt memory (hence not possible to inject code). So it is at worst a denial of service type attack.
merci beaucoup for you explanation and gnasher you too :)
I looked over his code analysis and I agree with his conclusion about it not being possible to corrupt memory (hence not possible to inject code). So it is at worst a denial of service type attack.
merci beaucoup for you explanation and gnasher you too :)
TurnerMan
Apr 26, 12:44 PM
Make this a part of my current MobileMe $199 family subscription.
more...
GilGrissom
Jul 25, 10:18 AM
Under System Requirements it doesn't mention Windows. Does this mean......?
You're right, it doesn't.
Could just mean they haven't put that info in yet, but I'd say it's a fairly good guess that because this is now bluetooth that it won't work with XP. I think this is a bad move if true, what about all those XP users on their Macs thanks to Boot Camp? (Not sure if it would work through Parrallels).
If I didn't already buy this normal Apple Wireless Mouse I'd order one now....grrr.
You're right, it doesn't.
Could just mean they haven't put that info in yet, but I'd say it's a fairly good guess that because this is now bluetooth that it won't work with XP. I think this is a bad move if true, what about all those XP users on their Macs thanks to Boot Camp? (Not sure if it would work through Parrallels).
If I didn't already buy this normal Apple Wireless Mouse I'd order one now....grrr.
BillyBates
Apr 7, 01:26 PM
Does anyone have any previous experience of buying WWDC tickets from eBay?
If I can find a reasonably-priced one then I might go for it, but I don't want to get turned away at the door :(
If I can find a reasonably-priced one then I might go for it, but I don't want to get turned away at the door :(
Padraig
Jul 12, 07:55 AM
Don't know how true this is, but if correct demonstrates MS determination to take losses to dominate the market. From Engadget,
But it gets better. To attract current iPod users Microsoft is going to let you download for free any songs you've already bought from the iTunes Music Store. They'll actually scan iTunes for purchased tracks and then automatically add those to your account. Microsoft will still have to pay the rights-holders for the songs, but they believe it'll be worth it to acquire converts to their new player.
http://www.engadget.com/page/4/
But it gets better. To attract current iPod users Microsoft is going to let you download for free any songs you've already bought from the iTunes Music Store. They'll actually scan iTunes for purchased tracks and then automatically add those to your account. Microsoft will still have to pay the rights-holders for the songs, but they believe it'll be worth it to acquire converts to their new player.
http://www.engadget.com/page/4/
Dan--
Apr 29, 04:04 PM
I haven't bought a single song from Amazon, not because I'm against them (I luv my Prime membership), but because they only sell MP3's that simply don't sound as good as an AAC file at an equivalent bit rate. Dropping the price to 69 cents doesn't improve the quality of the product and that's not good enough for me.
Amazon sells mostly LAME encoded 256kbs mp3 files, which are pretty comparable to the AAC files ITMS sells. AAC may have a slight advantage (for example see http://www.head-fi.org/forum/thread/271330/256-vbr-aac-vs-320-mp3-vs-256-vbr-mp3#post_3459768), but not much.
Viva la FLAC! Viva la Apple Lossless!
Si!
When are they gonna start selling lossless??
Amazon sells mostly LAME encoded 256kbs mp3 files, which are pretty comparable to the AAC files ITMS sells. AAC may have a slight advantage (for example see http://www.head-fi.org/forum/thread/271330/256-vbr-aac-vs-320-mp3-vs-256-vbr-mp3#post_3459768), but not much.
Viva la FLAC! Viva la Apple Lossless!
Si!
When are they gonna start selling lossless??
DeathChill
Apr 22, 10:25 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
Yargggh me crappy ATT! Who cares data speed isn't really the weakpoint right now.
Image (http://www.speedtest.net/iphone/89711689.png)
That's not even possible, is it? I thought the iPhone is capped by hardware at 7.2 Mbps?
Yargggh me crappy ATT! Who cares data speed isn't really the weakpoint right now.
Image (http://www.speedtest.net/iphone/89711689.png)
That's not even possible, is it? I thought the iPhone is capped by hardware at 7.2 Mbps?
Compile 'em all
Nov 11, 07:52 AM
just goes to show people still want to be able to see flash on their iphones reguardless of how bloated
I assume this means everyone want to be able to use iFart on their iPhones too?
Just because an app climbed up the charts doesn't mean they absolutely need the app. This is not how charting in the App Store works or means. I am pretty sure millions of iPhone users will be just fine without Angry Birds.
I assume this means everyone want to be able to use iFart on their iPhones too?
Just because an app climbed up the charts doesn't mean they absolutely need the app. This is not how charting in the App Store works or means. I am pretty sure millions of iPhone users will be just fine without Angry Birds.
rmwebs
Apr 28, 04:34 PM
I just did that, and loaded one of them into Photoshop for a little measurement. Here is what I got:
Image (http://www.marulla.com/files/thickness.png)
That ones not really too accurate due to the camera angle...its on a slope.
Also just run this through myself.
I get 79.2 on the White iPhone and 78.9 on the black. Given that I also had to level the image that sounds about right. Theres no way you can call your or my results accurate from a wonky photo however as photoshop attempts to enhance an image when rotating to level, thus distorting the original.
Image (http://www.marulla.com/files/thickness.png)
That ones not really too accurate due to the camera angle...its on a slope.
Also just run this through myself.
I get 79.2 on the White iPhone and 78.9 on the black. Given that I also had to level the image that sounds about right. Theres no way you can call your or my results accurate from a wonky photo however as photoshop attempts to enhance an image when rotating to level, thus distorting the original.
0815
Apr 26, 01:25 PM
i'm following the thread....the guy pays for 2TB drives to store his music on. music that he probably never paid for considering he has 2TB worth. your point?
A little harsh here - you don't know if he payed for the music or not and it might also contain movies and other stuff. I know many people that collect lots of music CD's and movie DVDs over the many moons they are on the planet and ripping that in high quality needs lots of storage. Many people try to rip at highest quality possible and that is expensive storage wise. Just don't assume it's is stolen - might be, but you and I don't know.
Why do people get so angry about the hypothetical details of a rumoured service?
Because many people get angry about just anything that Apple does ... so I'm not sure why they go to a MacRumor site which is apple biased - but that might be just a way for them to vent off their frustration with life.
A little harsh here - you don't know if he payed for the music or not and it might also contain movies and other stuff. I know many people that collect lots of music CD's and movie DVDs over the many moons they are on the planet and ripping that in high quality needs lots of storage. Many people try to rip at highest quality possible and that is expensive storage wise. Just don't assume it's is stolen - might be, but you and I don't know.
Why do people get so angry about the hypothetical details of a rumoured service?
Because many people get angry about just anything that Apple does ... so I'm not sure why they go to a MacRumor site which is apple biased - but that might be just a way for them to vent off their frustration with life.
ليست هناك تعليقات:
إرسال تعليق