ja30278

I hacked up something similar on appengine a few years ago, though it's more of a url shortener than a DynDNS replacment.

http://symlinkd.com

I've been eating a low-carb diet for the past 2 years. In that time, I've lost roughly 20lbs, while my blood work has gotten dramatically better. (Cholesterol: 160 (92 HDL, 64 LDL), Triglycerides: 46, Blood glucose: 92). More importantly, my energy level has 'evened out', such that I no longer get sleepy in the afternoons or feel sluggish after dinner in the evenings. I don't take special care to count calories, or avoid fatty foods. I eat lots of salads and vegetables, but also eat steak dipped in melted butter, and eggs-and-bacon for breakfast.

After I stopped eating carbs, I couldn't help but notice how much sugar is in _everything_ that most people eat. Most brands of peanut butter, for example, have sugar as the second ingredient. Ditto for 'whole wheat' bread, which frequently has sugar added.

Before beginning this diet, I was a believer in the calories-in/calories-out model, because of it's appealing simplicity. The truth is, your body isn't a calorimeter, and metabolizes different calorie sources in different ways..simple carbs break down easily, early in your digestive process, while proteins are broken down more slowly. Some foods can't be broken down at all without the help of intestinal flora, or are excreted without being digested at all. Thus, it's much more useful to say that, in order to lose weight, you have to _metabolize_ fewer calories than you burn, regardless of how many calories you consume.

Begging the question of how candidates achieve the Y level of support. Either they are already well known figures (actors, athletes, etc), or they have to spend money to make themselves known.

" And though all the winds of doctrine were let loose to play upon the earth, so Truth be in the field, we do injuriously by licensing and prohibiting to misdoubt her strength. Let her and Falsehood grapple; who ever knew Truth put to the worse in a free and open encounter?"

"..and we in the haste of a precipitant zeal shall make no distinction, but resolve to stop their mouths, because we fear they come with new and dangerous opinions, as we commonly forejudge them ere we understand them; no less than woe to us, while thinking thus to defend the Gospel, we are found the persecutors."

"For if they fell upon one kind of strictness, unless their care were equal to regulate all other things of like aptness to corrupt the mind, that single endeavour they knew would be but a fond labour: to shut and fortify one gate against corruption, and be necessitated to leave others round about wide open. If we think to regulate printing, thereby to rectify manners, we must regulate all recreations and pastimes, all that is delightful to man. No music must be heard, no song be set or sung, but what is grave and Doric. There must be licensing of dancers, that no gesture, motion, or deportment be taught our youth, but what by their allowance shall be thought honest; for such Plato was provided of. It will ask more than the work of twenty licensers to examine all the lutes, the violins, and the guitars in every house; they must not be suffered to prattle as they do, but must be licensed what they may say. And who shall silence all the airs and madrigals that whisper softness in chambers? The windows also, and the balconies, must be thought on; there are shrewd books, with dangerous frontispieces, set to sale: who shall prohibit them, shall twenty licensers? The villages also must have their visitors to inquire what lectures the bagpipe and the rebec reads, even to the balladry and the gamut of every municipal fiddler, for these are the countryman's Arcadias and his Monte Mayors."

Exactly so.

I don't understand why the 'Basic Job' idea doesn't get more traction. For all of the talk about a 'post work' world, I still see plenty of work that needs doing, every day.

Absolutely agreed.

It seems that some people won't be happy until all human interaction is mediated through vapid, inoffensive office-speak.

I am in my middle thirties now, and I feel that I'm probably the best I've ever been. Part of this, I think, is that true understanding comes from the ability to contextualize ideas into some larger framework of knowledge. I find myself revisiting things that I've learned earlier in life, but am now able to see them in a more meaningful way because of the experience and knowledge that I've gained in the interim.

In some ways, the idea that knowledge in combinatorial is perfectly obvious, but it can be really encouraging to realize that the things you learn today are making you more capable of learning and internalizing new things later.

Whether it assuages the conscience of white collar Americans or not, the fact is that the poor in America have it pretty good. The average poor person in America is overweight, not starving, and enjoys a standard of living far better than most people in developing countries. I have trouble relating to anyone for whom that isn't a relevant fact in any discussion of poverty.

I grew up poor, in the south, and am now comfortably middle class (still in the south). In my experience, the thing that keeps poor people poor is an unwillingness to put long-term success above short-term pleasure. Poor people buy cars they can't afford; they blow off work to go to the club with their friends; they have children young. Many poor people work hard, but very seldom are they working _toward_ anything beyond the next paycheck, or the next beer.

I found the counter-argument made in the first reply to be more compelling. http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2014-01/msg00178.html

Whether you agree with the FSF or not, their whole existence stems from their beliefs about software freedom. If they compromise their principles in exchange for 'market share', then they quite literally have no purpose.

The problem with the 'a calorie is a calorie' theory (which I used to subscribe to as well) is that is that your body doesn't burn food like a calorimeter. Different types of foods require very different amounts of energy to digest; some are only broken down with help from intestinal flora (or not at all)..while others are digested quickly and completely. Combine this with insulin's role in triggering fat storage, and you should be able to see that _what_ you eat, and not just how much, absolutely matters.

Exercise is wonderful, and (particularly strength training) can dramatically change how you look and feel. If you just want to lose weight though, just stop eating carbs.

It really is that simple. There are many ways to lose weight, but dropping sugar (in all it's forms) is the most straightforward. It's the closest thing to a 'weight hack' I've ever seen.

If you are currently overweight, just cut out carbs completely for 3 months..don't bother to count calories; don't fret about nonsense like whether your food is organic, or free range, or locally sourced. Just stop eating sugar. No rice, no potatoes, no bread, no sugared soft drinks, no pasta.

This is one of those insane comments that I only ever see on hacker news.

Who gives a shit how they pick up leaves in Europe? Picking up leaves isn't some artful process..it's drudgery which consumes some amount of my (finite) life, and which technology has provided a quicker solution.

In this case, you really should care. http://www.benfrederickson.com/2013/04/09/python-catastrophi...

China today reminds me of the US of the 1950s...growing fast, optimistic about the future, and willing to create it. Contrary to sentiment on HN, they aren't going to be drowned in their own pollution..they're going to win the future by not being afraid of it.

As an aside, I find that I usually disagree with anyone who feels compelled to frame their argument as an 'open letter'.

In this case, I agree that javascript is ubiquitous, and has the advantage of being delivered to the end-user in (more or less) source code form. However, the language itself is a mess, and it's a bit of a shame that we seem to have gotten stuck with it for so long as the only dynamic web runtime.

I think the most annoying thing about javascript is that people who learn it for web-programming seem to insist on using it everywhere, without regard for whether it's the best tool for the job.

Having a 'goal' of 50 women is quite different from having a quota of 50 men.

The only workable deterrent is the threat of a proportional (or more than proportional) response.

Since hacking is usually hard to pin down definitively to a single actor, and it's difficult to justify a conventional armed response, you probably want a response that has similar properties.

If you assume that China is the perpetrator, then the best response to hacking attacks is to let it be known to the Chinese government that any hacking attempts will be responded to by attempts to destabilize communist party control (encouraging dissidents through side-channels, developing/distributing tech to bypass the great firewall, etc)

He would favor limiting the actions of the federal government to the "enumerated powers" listed in the constitution:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enumerated_powers

I wonder if a payment provider (Visa, Amex, etc) could insert consumer friendly terms into their merchant agreements.

Consider the situation in which most subscribers of Comcast in your area wanted to switch..if there are enough of them to build a business, that strong 'latent' demand is a market waiting to happen.

Your comment seems to suggest that healthcare is an infinite resource. It isn't. There are a finite number of brilliant surgeons, a finite number of expensive MRI machines, a finite number of hospital beds, etc.

A market is just a means of determining distribution of a rivalrous resource. If it wasn't money, it would be something else (influence, political power, etc).

Having money, in general, is a proxy for the ability to create wealth. Thus, if you can't save everyone, and you have to use some mechanism for choosing who to save, then choosing to save the rich is a decent proxy for saving the people who create wealth. I happen to think that's a better system than some of the others ('who you know', 'how "good" your politics are')

different != superior.

bleh. So part of the price I pay for a Mac is now doled out to some charity of Apple's choosing. How about they just cut prices by the total amount of the match, and let me figure out where I'd like to donate.

Who said anything about helping them? I was responding to a comment that suggested we had no useful counter-strategy to hacking, since it's difficult to respond to a cyber attack via conventional means. They know this, which is why it's relatively safe for them to engage in targeted hacking of US targets.

China is vulnerable to social unrest, and stirring up that social unrest puts them in a similarly difficult position...it's not something that they'd likely be willing to go to war over, but causes them great inconvenience. Developing/distributing vpn or other software that would bypass the great firewall would be useful here.

The logical counter-response would be to encourage the sort of unrest present in the "Jasmine Revolution". This would present China with the same sort of dilemma...they might suspect (or even know) that we were stirring up trouble, but would probably be reluctant to go to war over it.

While it _seems_ bad to hire someone who's already receiving a pension, what's the alternative? Hiring someone else, who's unskilled, and _still_ paying the pension? Maybe the problem is the pension itself, not the double-dipping.

In this case, look at the target data that was recovered from a single control server: http://blogs.mcafee.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/ShadyRAT_...

US defense contractors; the governments of US, Canada, Vietnam, South Korea, Taiwan, and India; Democracy/Human Rights groups; mining, security, electronics, power companies.

That seems like an unlikely target list for someone who's in it for the 'lulz'.

> I find the Chinese explanation a little too convenient and a little too amenable to typical national defense thinking. What this article really says to me is that if you want to hack an American company, own a Chinese box first. Nobody will look any further.

Would you also limit your targets to things that would seem to be of overwhelming interest to the chinese government?

"They have not been charged yet, but the house was the source of 3,678 packets in about two-and-a-half hours."

really? were they mounting a DDOS attack using a pocket calculator attached to 4800 baud modem?

From the patent app: "As such, in one embodiment of the invention, the channel characterization matrix 616 at the Base Station is continually updated. In one embodiment, the Base Station 600 periodically (e.g., every 250 milliseconds) sends out a new training signal to each Client Device, and each Client Device continually transmits its channel characterization vector back to the Base Station 600 to ensure that the channel characterization remains accurate (e.g. if the environment changes so as to affect the channel or if a Client Device moves). In one embodiment, the training signal is interleaved within the actual data signal sent to each client device. Typically, the training signals are much lower throughput than the data signals, so this would have little impact on the overall throughput of the system. Accordingly, in this embodiment, the channel characterization matrix 616 may be updated continuously as the Base Station actively communicates with each Client Device, thereby maintaining an accurate channel characterization as the Client Devices move from one location to the next or if the environment changes so as to affect the channel. "