per olalonde, you'll probably find this post a lot more upvotes and survey participant conversions if you "open source" the survey. right now you're basically asking people to support closed/private research.. and not just any people.. you're asking the open source community -- the demographic i'd suppose least likely to respond to a closed survey.
based on the current parameters my participation does not follow.
sure, that's valid. it's also valid to acknowledge that their exists within that group a sub-group of people (albeit small) who DO actually have "the right idea" that WILL actually "pay multiples over the crappy returns the S&P has over the past 10 years", but DOES require going "all in" to achieve.
it's actually now understood that the balance of sodium to potassium in your diet is what's important, and not necessarily your sodium intake levels alone.
right. lets run a case study. go buy yourself a 50lb bag of sugar, a years supply of multivitamins, and report back in a year with how that worked out for you.
Well as a college student who went on a 2 month coco pebble binge (and only ate that because of sheer laziness), I didn't feel significant effects on brain power. But it does trash your body and leaves you feeling lethargic and lose motivation to actually do anything productive. I think the latter effects are just as dangerous as reduced "brain effectiveness". (this is just my experience, certainly not any scientifically proven study)
I didn't make the original claim, so I don't see why it would be my job to prove or disprove it.
That's sort of beside the point though. I'm just tired of the ridiculous amount of misinformation in the diet, nutrition, and exercise fields. It's not like there isn't a long history of claims that are "just common sense" turning out completely wrong ("eating fat makes you fat", "eating high cholesterol food gives you high cholesterol" (mostly genetics), "diet and exercise are equally important to losing weight" (reality is that it's mostly diet), etc.)
Bottom line, if you're going to make a claim that certain food improve your brain's performance, you should have just a shred of evidence.
i'd assumed you were trolling, hence the flippant response. i dont think all statements need to be supported with citations. there's a certain amount of knowledge that at some point has to be considered common sense. wiping your ass is one. not fueling your body with trash is another. i can understand your position of frustration at mis-information and pseudo-science, and appreciate a fellow critical thinker, but i do think it's important to choose your battles, and i do not think that this issue is one that's worth discussing much further, considering the overwhelming amount of data out there. vis a vis. et al. lorem ipsum.
...making great progress with the newly re-branded his "innie" and his/hers "outie" models. Since I'm bootstrapping (at the moment) my target markets are individual consumers, though the long-term roadmap calls for FDA Pharmaco-Therapeutic classification and Class II medical device approval by year 3.
What if I told you that this product sits at the forefront of a $15bn industry. Is that something you might be interested in?
it's not that absurd when you consider opportunity costs. even if your actual expenses are only 10k/yr, at a 7% avg rate of return, after 17 years you're down 170k plus ~140k in lost interest. at 20k/yr you hit 340k plus ~280k in lost interest.
This presumes people who don't have kids save the money instead, which quite frankly isn't at all true. People who don't have kids in large part just never learn to tighten their budget the way parents do, they live a higher cost of living lifestyle; in short, they act like single people. Now you could say "oh but I'd live broke like parents do and save the money" but frankly I wouldn't believe anyone who said that for a second.
In fact, I'd bring up the opportunity cost of maturity that having children brings you that you'd otherwise be missing out on by not having them. Maturity that quite frankly, probably saves you more money than you'd lose by having the child.
there's also the opportunity cost of spending the money on child-rearing for 17 years and not letting it sit and accrue interest somewhere. great use of "queering", by the way.
so the secret to cooking pizza like an engineer is to find a recipe you like and spend 6 years trying to reverse-engineer it? you must work for [your employer here] hrrhrr.. a hacker would have slipped one of the chefs, preps, or servers an andrew jackson and walked out with the recipe the same day.
also, what's up with people calling a flat piece of bread with half a diced tomato, 5 slices of cheese, and a sprig of basil to make it look "pretty", pizza? that's not "pizza", that's a dressed up keema naan at best.
where's the meat? whole wheat crust? olives? bacon? onions? ham? sausage? shrimp? artichoke hearts? red/black beans? bell peppers?
> pizza? that's not "pizza", that's a dressed up keema naan at best.
May I ask where you live? In some US states it is tough to find pizza good enough to make you see why this type of pizza can be so amazing. If my first hamburger had been ordered in England, I'm pretty sure I'd think hamburgers were terrible and pointless.
sf bay area.. though i dont think i've eaten any of the pizza out here.. i usually just make it myself.. throw in a bottle of wine and a dvd and you've got the makings of a decent date. subtract the human counterpart, add an "Innie" model [ http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1986883 ] and you'll have twice as much pizza left for the next day!
right, but pointing out that what he's made is nothing more than a glorified tortilla is to point out that a 95 page instruction manual on how to assemble a tortilla has unironically made it to the top of hackernews. but maybe that needs to be done.
