Sirona

 

Larry Wall (inventor of Perl) wrote that the three virtues of a programmer were laziness, hubris and impatience.

Sounds like they make charming partners then

It is a joke. A lazy person will not do the job at all. A lazy person will tell someone else to do the job and most often get all the credits by keeping the true worker in the dark.

That kind of manipulation and scheming seems like hard work

 

Except that religion may not only be about a god or gods but was designed to describe a better way to live.

 

The god element, for me, just provides a means to provide those that don’t understand concepts such as forgiveness and acceptance, an anchor that simulates meaning.

Why must we complicate matters further by redefining the term 'religion', it's unnecessary and confusing.

 

Forgiveness and acceptance comes from being a half decent person, regardless of whether you're religious or not. We shouldn't have to redefine the usage and meaning of the word 'religion' and be PC about it because some don't understand that religion and morality are not synonymous; why must we make excuses for ignorance?

 

 

Thread,

 

In a week it will be two years.

 

Quit my job, am still unemployed, my dad had brain surgery, my sister beat breast cancer, my wife got laid off from a job of 33 years, I just had a knee replaced...but I have not smoked.

Good for you, mate. It's very inspiring to hear success stories like yours and although I've never been a smoker, my grandmother died a few years ago of Emphysema. I assume it's more difficult to change your habits as you get older too.

 

It's very positive to see that overall the rates of smoking have decreased in Australia for both males and females. The rate fell from 27% in 2001 to 20% in 2011 in males and from 21% to 16% in females. That's a fairly significant decrease over a decade. However, the change occurred in the 18-44 years age group (males and females), remained largely unchanged for women over 55 but with a 3-5% decrease in men over 55.

 

The figures have continued to steadily decrease over the last 50 years.

 

Education is an important factor obviously, however, in Australia the cost of cigarettes has gone up significantly and there is significant data which shows a correlation between increase in taxes and price of tobacco and decreased consumption of tobacco.

 

Sources:

http://www.tobaccoinaustralia.org.au/13-5-impact-of-price-increases-on-tobacco-consumpt

http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/4125.0main+features3320Jan%202013

 

 

I'm all in favour of glorifying lazy.

If it doesn't need doing, don't do it.

If it needs doing then do it in the way that takes the least time and energy.

 

Or, as Bill gates put it

"

“I choose a lazy person to do a hard job. Because a lazy person will find an easy way to do it.”"

Hm, to automate, or not to automate...

 

I'd choose lying in bed with a good book over cleaning and cooking for myself any day. Now, if only I could automate my job too.

Hypochondria is a possibility.

+ 1

 

Hypochondria is more likely than the tap water actually making you ill. It's reasonably common, occurring in 4-6% of the population and is 3-4 times more likely to affect women. Hypochondria has three common presentations and it seems you may have a bodily preoccupation; in this case individuals report having multiple somatic symptoms and believe it is due to some serious disease and become anxious and fearful, often doubting doctors and believing something was missed in the diagnosis.

 

I generally don't like the idea of people asking for medical advice online for a number of reasons:

 

1. You're more than likely going to get a wrong diagnosis because we're either unqualified or we don't have enough data through physical examination and tests to give you a diagnosis.

 

2. It's likely that you're going to stress more over the possible diagnosis.

 

3. If your problem turns out to be real and not psychosomatic then you're delaying treatment.

 

Seek a third of fourth professional opinion if necessary to alleviate your concern, but asking people for medical advice online is just going to make you assume the worst in most cases and it's not going to achieve anything other than further fear and anxiety.

I don't believe in God(s) which is different than than affirming that one believes there must not be God(s). For example; I do not believe in bigfoot. They theoretically could exist. I have just never seen any good evidence and don't believe they do. There is no associated leap of faith made in that assessment.

I've always been in the same position and feel there is little point into delving too much thought into religion for that reason. Sure, it's theoretically possible if we lived in a simulated reality. How likely is that? I don't even think there is a point in asking because it's not particularly useful? It's too philosophical. I personally don't ponder too deeply about things there is no good evidence of.

I understand that during various events many facts are unknown. That the media is just out there trying to get information out quickly as possible but they should have some responsibilty to not make matter worse? During an emergency shouldn't they encourage people to remain calm? After the Boston Marathon bomb there were early reports that ciculated various images of "suspicious" people with backpacks that later turned out to not be involved. How is that time of speculative reporting any other than fiction? Just a editing room pulling up video of the crowd and saying 'maybe this guy, oh, maybe this other guy".

Sure, good point. Though, sometimes news articles aren't false due to journalists trying to get information to the public as soon as possible and reporting events as they are occurring. At times they can be be purely careless, hear something and report on it without any preliminary research and not just on news stories but feature articles too. There is little excuse to have a completely false feature article since they're supposed to be well researched and take a greater deal of time to put together. However, sometimes a journalists motivation is pure narcissism and they simply want to get their name on anything. An example was the series of 'Blonde Extinction' articles from BBC news, ABC, CNN, and the Daily mail (No surprise at all from these guys).

 

Here is one of the articles: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/2284783.stm

 

If you read it, you'll notice that it's very vague using terms like 'A study by experts in Germany' (Who are they? What was the study about? Where is the data/findings from the study?), 'Finland will be the birthplace of the last blonde' (How do they know this?). This is also a straight out lie, 'A study by the World Health Organisation found that natural blonds are likely to be extinct within 200 years because there are too few people carrying the blond gene. According to the WHO study, the last natural blond is likely to be born in Finland during 2202.' There was no WHO study found to support this and the 'German experts' cannot be named.

 

The Washington Post found that after doing some research, the story was snapped up from from a women's magazine named 'Allegra'. http://jclass.umd.edu/archive/newshoax/casestudies/scimed/SciBlondWP.html

 

It just goes to show that referencing and sources, unless they're specific with citations and links are not reliable either. In this case, journalists had the time to research the blonde gene and there was no urgency to get these articles to the public. It would have made no difference whether they published this article in an hour, one day or a month as it's not something the public needed to be informed about right away. It just highlights the carelessness and narcissism which unfortunately is a bit part of journalism.

 

Your nickname is not feminine.Your avatar is not feminine.You were/are gaining some up votes in banning/suspending people, that are inadequately increasing mods/admins reputation,but you have also plentiful "right" upvotes for knowledge that you have showed and shared with others who asked for it. Unlike her. I have not seen any single her post I would like to upvote.Upvoting your post, except in banned/suspended section, is just because of your knowledge (which should be appreciated), not sex.Some might not even know you're women. And that how should be in science community. Knowledge should rules over sexualism and sexism.Even though we have spring, and some might not control their hormones on the leash..Your upvotes (except banned/suspended section) seem to be well deserved.

I honestly don't understand what it is about me that offends some of you so. Do I not have a right to be feminine? Do I not have the right of being confident and comfortable enough to reveal myself? Do I need to self censor myself even when I'm not breaking any rules to hide who and what I am? I've not asked for upvotes or popularity; this is your choice to give me positive reputation. I've never claimed to be knowledgeable and I don't believe I lack humility or modesty. However, I can be confident and proud of who and what I am and have the freedom to exert this without the degradation. If you disagree with my posts, feel I am breaking the rules or you find me unhelpful and a poor contributor then by all means vote me down because I don't want or expect preferential treatment. If majority feel that I've somehow brought about unpleasantness, then I will gladly leave. However, if is not the case, you can expect me to stay and continue to be myself. This is who and what I am and if you find me offensive and unlikeable then you do your best to ignore me because you can't expect to like and get along with everyone in life and that can be transferred to online.

As Iodine said, it depends because in some cases genetics may play a much more significant factor. It seems that environmental factors plays a significant role in human immune variation based on twin study. A Stanford study led by Mark Davis, discovered that exposure to a single chronic, viral infection could have a significant effect on the system’s composition and responsiveness. It seems that non genetic influences, especially microbes, play a large part in driving immune variation.

They just make expensive urine.

Here is an interesting story of how dodgy TGA regulations can be and how health supplement manufacturers can bypass the regulations.

 

https://theconversation.com/supplement-regulation-by-tga-is-completely-cactus-13451

 

Furthermore, a lot of herbal supplements don't contain much of those substances and some not at all and are bulked with rice powder and wheat. A New York Times article found that several herbal supplements sold in Target: ginkgo biloba, St John's wort and valerian root did not have any of the herbal ingredients listed on the label. Instead they found powdered vegetables: rice, peas and carrots.

http://mobile.nytimes.com/blogs/well/2015/02/03/sidebar-whats-in-those-supplements/?referer=

 

There is a lot of fraud in the industry as there is a lot of money to be made from feeding people's insecurities and hypochondria.

Yeah, good thing that there is only a moderate increase in female avatars. I am almost out of upvotes.

Your brilliance, Charon is enough to stimulate the mind and senses for a lifetime

Ooohh, I know! We should start selling a placebo, then!!Oh wait, looks like most folks are already doing that.

Hah, and eating less sugar will in turn make you crave less sugar; no need to buy untested or regulated supplements which cost a fortune.

Bingo! Yes, very sirenesque.

 

Veronica.jpg

I think it's the black and white photograph that makes her look sirenesque.

I took an amazing supplement called yeast cleanse by the company Now and it caused my body to stop bein addicted to excess sugar. It worked in one week. I believe we can become overcome with candida and that also causes the cravings for sugar. I know my problem was severe... the herbs killed the excess candida.

Your post sounds like an ad.

 

Currently there is no clinical evidence that Candida can treat any legitimate medical condition. There are plenty of 'unrecognised' illnesses to market and sell health products to treat nonexistent problems.

 

Your decrease in sugar cravings was most likely a placebo effect.

 

 

I stopped reading after seeing 'God' and 'Angels' because when you said 'world changing organisation' I thought you were referring to a real organisation. Or at least one that could exist at some point in the future.

The best example is probably the News International Phone Hacking Scandal and how News of the World violated the Computer Misuse Act 1990 by unethically and illegally gaining access to the confidential phone calls of celebrities, hence violating rights to privacy by misuse of power. For what reason? To expose celebrities for their 'sinful' acts because that's what average people enjoy reading and what sells. It's this 'busybody' nature I find particularly concerning.

I am not sure about the US as I am Australian, however, if you ask most Australians to tell you something about Bill Clinton I can almost certainly say that they will mention Monica Lewinski. Never mind about Kosovo, welfare reform or Iraq sanctions, he had an affair! He cheated on his wife! Can you believe it?

Some avatar of a real woman that fits Jessica Rabbit's visual message would be a perfect test subject because she is alluring and sultry, without being overtly sexual in a tasteless way. With Daphne Blake, although she is attractive, she doesn't have the former attributes which need to be clearly apparent for such a test, I think. I think Daphne would gain reps mainly on intellectual merit if she were an SFN member. To be honest, even if SFN male members were so shallow, it wouldn't persist for long if the brain didn't match the beauty. Physical beauty is like wallpaper, it soon peels off.

 

Edit: I take it all back,,, check out the avatar.

That avatar is cut too low to receive only intellectual merit, Junky!

 

Maybe if I move my camera back a little in my next picture 1/2 my posts will receive a rep instead of 1/3

I love Daniel Craig's Bond, but I think if he were to try slapping Jessica Rabbit around, he'd sing a different toon. Probably in a higher voice.

She's out of his league!

The 24/7 cycle does seem to force journalists to rush stories to be the first to report. Again, the emphasis is on ratings and profit rather than on accurately informing the public the way it should be. This in particular seems to be a big problem. Stories that require depth get skimmed with this method, and as Ten oz mentions, waiting for a story to develop gives us more to go on than a cursory, kneejerk appraisal.

 

On stories like that, putting spin early in the news cycle seems foolhardy. I think is why they don't source themselves, and why the news gets to be more and more vague, so it can appeal to the most viewers.

Sure, that's true but you could also just skim through daily news and read news analysis for a better researched, informative and in-depth analysis. There are news magazines/journals which have weekly articles and the reporters are not only more experienced but have less pressure to spit out a story as fast as possible.

 

Unfortunately people enjoy tabloids, especially in a nation of busybodies who are more interested in gossip than news. Take the Sydney Morning Herald for example, you only need to read the comments section to know the paper is aiming at the average Joe.

Jessica rabbit, although extremely asthetically pleasing to the senses is a wee bit too obvious and sultry. My pixel girl crush would have to be Daphne Blake who is a delightful mixture of intelligence and sophistication and leaves just enough for the imagination.

 

I'm glad I wasn't around for Swansont's Connery avatar, he was my least favourite Bond. I'm not a Scottishist, I would just prefer not being slapped around once rescued.

Sadly there are some things covered so poorly that even 3-4 articles from different sources don't cut to the facts. I have found that often times we don't get the truth for at least a month after a story breaks. Initial reports often tend to be extrapolations, exaggerations, or so lacking in facts that they are works of pure fiction influenced by current events.

That's true. Most news stories contain very little facts in general. I would say that 'pure fiction' is an exaggeration too. Sometimes those stories can be extremely useful because although they may contain very little facts, they give you a lot of information about intent and motivation. One thing I find particularly annoying is the lack of referencing even in my 'trusted' news sources. References would would ensure a lot more validity and accountablity.

Who is this 'world changing organisation'? How will they help? What are they changing exactly? Can you be specific?

 

What creates change? Communication, ideas, tolerance, education, responsibility.

 

You claim you've made this your life's work, but what exactly needs to change? And more importantly, how do you propose it will happen? Identifying a problem is only the first step.

 

Your picture and post remind me of the poem 'This lime tree bower my prison', look around you and there is beauty everywhere; this is purely perspective.

 

Analyse the facts I've given you in previous posts, the world is becoming less violent and more tolerant despite your 'gut' feeling.

Often it's not even about being intentionally misleading, dishonest or misrepresenting facts though, but having a different slant. For example, I read both the Conversation and Quadrant; both news sources I find relatively reliable. The Conversation is somewhat leftist, however, Quadrant is more conservative. I read them both for comparison and generally find that although they're generally both factual and attempt to be transparent, there are different emphasis even on the same story. They'll each highlight different facts, or particular quotes, leave out data that they believe is unimportant, the choice of language. it doesn't necessarily make them dishonest or misleading but they have different perspectives. I don't think any news source is reliable on it's own, i have a handful of online news sources which I 'trust' and after reading about the same story 3-4 times from different perspectives, I form my own opinion. I'm not conservative, but will read them anyway for comparison.

This is very immature and has absolutely nothing to do with sexism but a strategic cover up of sour grapes by means of diversion. This offends me profoundly because you've made little attempt to be ambiguous in your accusation and yet you've not the valiance to even include my name; it's gutless and reflects poorly only on yourself.

Rest assured that I am not wanting to win a popularity contest and am indifferent to my rank. I've nothing to prove and you're right about one thing only, I'm inferior to most of you when it comes to scientific knowledge, but I am here to expand on my existing knowledge. I try my best to use evidence-based research when presenting my ideas and don't post unless I have some preliminary knowledge in the area. If you believe my posts are lacking, by all means give them a thumbs down; receiving preferential treatment would be degrading to anyone. I want to be here as an equal and should be able to without having to pretend I am someone I'm not to receive respect and recognition.

Why should I not have a profile picture of myself? Some like anonymity and I like transparency; I'd like to know what you all look like too, not because I am interested in any possible sexual pursuit but because I like familiarity. Interaction and connection with people has always been the most important thing for me and that extends to online relationships too. What upsets me most about this post is that you're undermining my integrity without knowing any information about me at all and you've attempted to humiliate me publicly further.

I'm not going to disappear with your passive-aggressive attempt at bulling, I'm not going to change my display picture or my mannerisms and I suggest if you have any further problems with me you put it in a PM.

On the other hand, the internet allows one to access minds and information that one might not find in their locality...and up-to-date as well. I was a committed bookworm as a child, reading at least one a day. The only trouble was, the books I got from the library about science, in the 60s and 70s were at least 10 to 20 years out of date. Flemming, Curie, Koch, Pasteur et al were the most recent that I found there. Now, one can read about stuff that's just in planning phase. Amazing. I've done all those things that you lament are absent in modern youth, I am more than happy to drown myself in the internet now... input ...data! I find it quite shocking how many people now are looking at their devices or got headphones on in public, absent in mind from the life going on around them.

Absolutely. I remember I had a math teacher who was wrong about almost everything; he even made us tear out the answers in the back of our textbooks because apparently they too were wrong. That's when a smart phone came in handy in the classroom the most because you can't always trust state education either