ThoughtVoid

Can I ask what you mean by "non-standard" light? Light is a type of electromagnetic radiation...there is no "standard". Just different frequencies and wave lengths. Below visible light is infrared, and above it is UV. You implied that the wall looks yellowish.... the color pattern when broken down looks red orange yellow green blue violet. If you see a yellow tint, then the light is producing more reds and yellows (towards the infrared). So, considering what I've said and the fact that you said "a normal light will damage vision", so will any heat emitting stove coil - lit up or not. By the way...the sun is a giant nuclear reactor. It produces the highest end of the spectrum for electromagnetic radiation that we know of; gamma radiation. This level of energy can only be achieved in nuclear reactions. The only way we live through it is the magnetic fields of our planet. What I'm saying is, it isn't the "non-standard" lighting that hurts your eyes, it the amount of energy hitting your cornea, burning it.

Agreed, after installing all the main stream one (excluding xandros and Gentoo....also I used Fedora core 3, not Red Hat....) I ended up with Suse. In my opinion none are really "difficult" to use; just some take patients to set up. Suse on the other hand (and fedora core 3/Simply Mepis) intall nearly automonously. Gentoo is probibly the lengthiest to install, but the end results "fit like a glove" if you do everything right. I didn't have time to try since I needed to start writing a paper lol. Hence, I ended up with suse and love it....I'd go with it over any distro I've tried.

Mine is Indian for "the fish swims up river". Actually I have no idea when, where, or why I came up with it....I have been using it for a long time. If anyone can come up with a deep philosophical meaning that I can apply to it (to sound half intelligent of course ) please do lol.

Why do I have a feeling that all three of these posts were just copied and pasted from some one who actually wrote them? (I mean, they are only all in the same perfect format.) Did I menchion the writing style doesn't match that of his real post?

Huh? Having gone through sports medicine and personal trainer courses, I do know a bit about about physical health and loosing fat. Most of these ideas make little rational sense. To start off, there is no such of thing as targeted fat burning. To loose fat in one area, you muct loose a proportional amount everywhere in your body. So, the correct way to loose fat is cardiovascular exercise for more then 15 hard minutes. Then of course, if you wish to have definition, loosing fat one be enough - the skin wont be tight. Then you have to increase muscle size by lifting wieghts every other day. Now, on to why non of your ideas make much sense: Rubbing salt on your skin/adding it to your water: The fact is your skin wont take in the salt. Instead, it will expell water. This is the only thing that will happen. It's called osmosis through a semi-permiable barrier. Google it if you don't believe me. The other reason why this would not do anything to loose fat is that NaCl has nothing to do with the break down of fat. Fat needs water to break down - not salt. The need for water is part of the chemical process it uses to bond. Therefore, the salt did nothing. The messaging: could you explain the point of this? No offense, but fat wont react to the application of pressure. Up downs....ok, your working a few muscles in this exercise, sensible. But it wont get rid of far. As for the cellophane trying to make your arms sweat - just wear a sweatshirt. The cellophane is unhealthy for your skin. Finally, the body building cream: from the sound of it your not exactly in the gym or on the track everyday (hence having fat arms). Even with people who are lifting almost daily, this cream is a waste; for you its not necessary (assuming what I've said is true). As I've already said, your skin doesn't absorb nutrients. This is why we have a digestive system. So, despite all that I've bashed your meathods, I'm happy that you're happier. Just letting you know there are better tactics.

I guess I'll save the day:Each one alternatingly pours the pepsi into the cap of the bottle (filling the cap) and then into the glass. They do this until the pepsi bottle is empty, and each glass has 50% of the origonal; plus or minus a few ml. Hows that for an answer? lol

I would either get something like this. Or save for a while and get an even higher model. It's a complete desktop; so that performance rating really is at a good price. Alienware's are great for gaming, and plus you get a awsome looking case. lol

I'll admit, the USA NBA team loosing in any way during the olympics is pathetic. But...look at our baseball team. It didn't even qualify for the olympics. Baseball! This is america's passtime. Personally, I think it is wrong for players to live and work in this county, make millions off of american consumers, and then they go represent Italy because their heratige lies there and not here. This is why we are starting to loose - many of our good players would rather play for their home countries then the United States. Personally, I think it is wrong to get rich off, and live with, a group of people, then represent another group that your ties are weaker with.

Ok, I have evidence for what I last posted now...The apple I pod pricing (40 gig). Now, Here is the thrity dollar more Iriver with the same 40 gigs. But, look at the i-river's features, and compare them to the I-pod. For $30 dollars you get a whole lot more...including color screen. Now, lets say you want a color screen on your i-pod....ok same i-river for comparison, but this i-pod instead. This one costs an insane $499. Thats $70 dollars more for less features. If you wanted to spen $499 at I-river, Look at what you could buy! See my point about why I didn't go I-pod?

I don't have an I-pod, but I did shop for (and buy) and mp3 player recently. Basically I liked the I-pod's storage and looks (not to menchion their popularity), but I had a few problems with what it came with. Instead of including voice recording, radio, radio recording, direct line in recording etc, you could buy adapters to make it do all of this. Now for a few dollars more then the origonal price of the i-pod, I can get myself an I-river (which I did) and get all of what I said included in one, simple to use, and compact unit. Sure both would have probibly worked out for me, but I like convenience.

I think you are heavily confusing your lighting. LEDs are the coolest lighting on the market - thats what makes them so efficient. Instead of wasting energy on heating a gas or a thin wire, the most energy goes into producing light. Also, street lights don't use LED's; they just are powerful enough yet. Instead streetlights use a type of HID lighting involving mercury and sodium vapor...I'd explain how the light actually worked, but I think it would be a waste of time (unless someone really wants me to). Anyhow, HID bulbs do give off massive amounts of heat - stadium lighting for example. The point is, I believe you are confusing the realtively small, underpowered (at the moment), LED with the older, highly established Sodium phosphorus bulbs.

Ha! God bless Replay T.V. All I have to do is record the show and watch it at any time. When the commercial comes on...zap 30 second skip with over skip compensating. However, lately I have been having to watch some live commercials with the purchase of our HDTV. The replay can only record up to 480i...not quite the same quality I can get from a live HD broadcast. Anyways, I pity the torture you all go through having to watch marketer's ideas on how to sell you junk.

Here is my Desktop.... As you can see, I just switched to Suse linux and am a bit "egoistic" .

I'm not sure if everyone understands what a sugar is. Sugar's are carbohydrates; carbohydrates are sugars. There is no difference between the two....however "sugar" usually referes to the broken down monosaccharaide glucose. As already stated, this is the "refined sugar". Basically, it has been broken down (a process your body usually does for you) so it can go directly to your blood - terrible for your body (and very addicting). Also, remember that cellulose is also a sugar. So, you could go out and eat the trunk of a tree and be consuming mostly sugar, but it would most certainly not taste sweet (nor would your body be capable to break the cellulose into gluscose with boiling it before consuming - every wonder why celery gets soft when you cook it?)

Ok, this is going to be a short post...what the hell are you talking about? If your proposing that on the back of the ingredients list "nuclear waste" will be there, give me a source for your post. It is a little far fetched that even Bush (yes, I don't like Bush or his policy) would try to do this.

Sigh....being a vegetarian I'm dissapointed when I see people not see what the meaning of organic is. You realize the FDA and USDA define organic something to the effect of "containing, comosed of, or based upon carbon". In fact, this definition is what it should be; since organic really means: "Of, relating to, or derived from living organisms" (The American Heritage? Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition). Thus, since we don't know of any non carbon-based life form, the definition works either way you go. So....organic vegtables should not be trusted anymore then the cheaper one next to it unless you know the source of growing. One last thing: the reason your grandma's vegtables taste so much better are not because they're "organic". They taste better due to freshness. Store bought vegatables were picked ranging from a week to several weeks ago depending on the season. Your grandma's crops are picked, then eaten. They are not sorted, stored, and the shipped countless times. (By the way, it's much more labor intensive to grow thousands of acres of crops without pesticides then with them).

No, I've never owned a LeMans before. I have a 95' Mx-3. I'd love to have something classic one day...but for now I'll stick to more modern and fuel efficent. I just googled those pictures, but I already knew what they looked like so my opinion was set. However, I also wouldn't mind having something from a early (67-68) camero, mustang (of course), Nova, olds 442, maverick, and maybe an early firebird. 1970 Olds 442: 1976 Maverick: 1973 Nova: If you go foriegn, I would definately go with either a datsun 240z or 280z. The 260z and all zx models are to bloated for my liking...but they look the same pre-1980. Also, it doesn't have very much power stock (70-80hp), but the pre 77 toyota celicas are beautiful in my opinion. 240z: post 75 celica Just ask if you want any others.

Carbohydrates are not the problem....Niether are protiens....Niether are fats ....In fact, food isn't the problem. Everything is an energy source, and your body needs a certain amount of energy per day. Un-used energy is usually stored. So guess what the answer is? Use it! I eat about 3,000 calories a day but I'm 5'11" and 157lbs. Guess how I maintain that weight? I lift wieghts (I'm actually trying to gain muscle wieght now), and run 3-6 miles DAILY. I haven't missed a day of running in over 4 months. However, for those that can't run, carbs shouldn't be feared...they should be embraced. Do you know what the difference between a carbohydrate and a sugar is?(jeopordy theme music)Nothing. There is nothing such as a "sweet" carbohydrate as stated above. Infact, most polysaccaraides are made up of 3 main monosaccaraides: fuctose, galactose, and glucose. Your body can only use glucose as an energy source. ALL other carbohydrates must either be broken down into the monosaccharide form, or converted from one monosaccharides type to glucose. There is no other option. If there was any type of carbhydrate that one needed to cut down on, it would be the simple- monosaccharides. For example, look on the back of a normal soda can - high fructose corn syrup - diabeteis in a bottle. Now, since we have defined what a carbohydrate is (I hope I have...its late though), lets see how terrible they really are. Lets start with celory...about 97% cellulose. That is a polysaccharide consisting of 500 gluscose molecules in an alternating line pattern. So thats 500x34atp (very small energy amounts) = somewhere between 1500-1700atp (not very many calories when converted). BUT WAIT! The body can't digest cellulose like it's brother starch. The only difference is the alternating sequence in the chain, but that means a lot. Ever wonder why cellery gets soft when boiled? You're breaking down the cellulose...now your body can digest it. Back to starch, a 500 glucose chain your body can deigest. They only way it can break it down is through an enzyme in your mouth called salivary amylase. Once this enzyme gets to your stomach, the ph levels make it ineffective. Thus, once a starch molecule makes it intact to your stomach, it acts just like cellulose.The moral of the story...carbohydrates are both the enemy (simple) and best friend (complex). Also, Dr. Atkins is another fad diet creator idiot. If you want me to go into further detail on anything else, I gladly will at an earlier time of night. Thank you.

Could you please explain how war makes money? The expenditures on government workers (soldiers in combat pay), transportation, logistics, materials, food, clothing, fuel, etc, far surpasses any money we might obtain through spoils of war (might I add that US citizens would never go with that idea anyhow). The only positive effect a war could possibly have is domestic industry building. For example WW2: major industries in ports, ships, aluminum, timber, planes, automobiles, power sources, and other things that we know and love today, were expanded immensely during WW2. They had to be for soilder's supplies. But this war does not require what that did. We are just going further into debt, and there is not going to be and post war boom...its just not demanding enough. In saying that, I support the troop 110%. That is why I don't support the war. How can one support a soldier any more then wanting him home; out of harms way? War is a terrible loss of life, unfortunately, for evil to triumpf good men must merely do nothing.

When is longhorn planned to be released? I did a google and couldnt find much. Hopefully I won't spend the money since I just switched to linux lol

I've had both cable and dsl. For my area, which is rather far from a large telephone HQ (for lack of a better term) cable is by far superior. With dsl I rarely reached 500kbps. Cable I can push the advertised 1.5mbs. Its really nice to download things that fast after having dsl. However, I have heard that dsl is better for gaming...not sure why this would be though.

Been using Pop with Thunderbird aswell...works great. I'm just glad they finally have pop support...I have having to open a browser to view mail....and waiting for a new page to load every time I read an email. I have 1.5mbs too lol .

Well, I must say thank you to this topic. I just spent the last week switching to Linux. It took many distros, but I've finally found one that I like. I started with Mandrake, Peanut, Knoppix, SimplyMepis, Mandrake again, Fedora Core, Novell evaluation, then I ended up on Suse (since I like Novell, I D/L free version of Suse). I can honestly say I love it. Stable, fast, easy to manipulate. Suse is known for being feature packed...true, it has the option to add the most packages out of any distro I downloaded. However, it was just that - an option. I can add what I want, remove what I want, all when I want extremely easily. I almost tried Gentoo for that reason...but the setup seemed to lengthy for me to just try another distro. There are only two complaints:Suse makes it very hard to obtain a free version. They allow it, but almost hide the instructions and mirrors to do so. Granted, I'll probibly donate because I like their software...but still. I can not seem to configure the firewall to allow me to connect to my network. Not a huge problem...just disable when I need to print or share files. But still an inconvience for me (and many others as I've noticed by doing a google for a fix).Over all...way better then windows.

Well, I don't have a "moniter" per say. However, I do have this computer hooked up to the 37" Sharp Aquos (LCD) via S-video. I do have side bars since the TV is 16:9 format, however the picture is worth it ( size and clarity). I'm looking into getting a smaller LCD screen that I will use for just computing so I can watch TV and be on the computer at the same time. Also, I'd love to get rid of this CRT monitor.EDIT: If someone wants a picture to see the picture, id be happy to post, but my camera wont do the picture justice.

I saw (and posted in) the other topic as well, so since I'm somewhat of a car nut I thought I'd post here too. Here are the two to compare side by side... GTO: LeMans: Personally I prefere the GTO. But, if I was to buy a GTO, I think I would buy something a little earlier...maybe 63-65? Heres a 1964 GTO: Of course... I like them all, and If I could afford any GTO (the gas) I probibly would.