Groups > alt.folklore.computers > #161395 > unrolled thread

Which Books Can You Recommend For Learning Computer Programming?

Started by	Neo Fortune <serenity3043@gmail.com>
First post	2016-03-23 02:31 -0700
Last post	2016-03-30 14:56 +0100
Articles	20 on this page of 401 — 44 participants

Back to article view | Back to alt.folklore.computers

Page 14 of 21 — ← Prev page 1 … 12 13 [14] 15 16 … 21 Next page →

#162540

From	Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org>
Date	2016-04-16 07:08 +0000
Message-ID	<slrnnh3p87.8p5.plan.b@ID-309335.user.uni-berlin.de>
In reply to	#162507

On Fri, 15 Apr 2016 12:05:59 -0400, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> wrote:
>> In article <MPG.317751437839b71198a0c5@news.eternal-september.org>,
>>  "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> No, helicopter parenting and parental fear of the big bad world does 
>>> that.  I suspect that in the modern world my parents would have been 
>>> arrested for letting me do the sorts of things that I and my friends 
>>> did.  I suspect that if they knew, _they_ would have been horrified.
>> 
>> Good thing they didn't find out then. Small children need to do things
>> that would horrify there parents for normal development. Many adults
>> completely forget their childhood, apparently.
>> 
>
> I Remember well, I often marvel that I'm still alive, etc.
>

We were discussing this in the pub a while back...most of the things
we did as kids/teenagers are now illegal* or so bound by regulations as
to be not worth doing :-)

*  Many were illegal then, such as putting a .303 round in a knot-hole
in a fence and hitting the primer with a hammer and nail!  Satisfying
bang but the bullet didn't travel far.

-- 
Stan Barr     plan.b@bluesomatic.org

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#162544

From	mausg@mail.com
Date	2016-04-16 10:03 +0000
Message-ID	<slrnnh43e5.18p.mausg@Smaus.org>
In reply to	#162540

On 2016-04-16, Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Apr 2016 12:05:59 -0400, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> wrote:
>>> In article <MPG.317751437839b71198a0c5@news.eternal-september.org>,
>>>  "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> No, helicopter parenting and parental fear of the big bad world does 
>>>> that.  I suspect that in the modern world my parents would have been 
>>>> arrested for letting me do the sorts of things that I and my friends 
>>>> did.  I suspect that if they knew, _they_ would have been horrified.
>>> 
>>> Good thing they didn't find out then. Small children need to do things
>>> that would horrify there parents for normal development. Many adults
>>> completely forget their childhood, apparently.
>>> 
>>
>> I Remember well, I often marvel that I'm still alive, etc.
>>
>
> We were discussing this in the pub a while back...most of the things
> we did as kids/teenagers are now illegal* or so bound by regulations as
> to be not worth doing :-)
>
> *  Many were illegal then, such as putting a .303 round in a knot-hole
> in a fence and hitting the primer with a hammer and nail!  Satisfying
> bang but the bullet didn't travel far.
>

One thing that I learned about that. A catridge in a gun is activated, 
the ffirst thng happens is that the catridge ssprings out to grip 
the chamber the bullet enters the barrel. That means that if the bullet
is beeing held by the fingers, the fingers are blown off first, then the bullet
pops away.

Case A. You have a shotgun. fire it at something, slight `ping',
 nothing happens.   What do you do next.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     

-- 
greymaus

iD|marrA Raa|fLa 
Ireland

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#162549

From	Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net>
Date	2016-04-16 13:43 +0100
Message-ID	<20160416134306.6d8892f066e82af6a0fad087@eircom.net>
In reply to	#162544

On 16 Apr 2016 10:03:13 GMT
mausg@mail.com wrote:

> Case A. You have a shotgun. fire it at something, slight `ping',
>  nothing happens.   What do you do next.

	Well first you get a torch and look down the barrels, maybe poke a
stick down too, then you open it in front of your face to get a good look at
and replace the faulty cartridge.

	It shouldn't take too many repeats to qualify for a Darwin award.

-- 
Steve O'Hara-Smith                          |   Directable Mirror Arrays
C:>WIN                                      | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins.                |    licences available see
You lose and Bill collects.                 |    http://www.sohara.org/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#162572

From	mausg@mail.com
Date	2016-04-16 20:32 +0000
Message-ID	<slrnnh58a5.1lj.mausg@Smaus.org>
In reply to	#162549

On 2016-04-16, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
> On 16 Apr 2016 10:03:13 GMT
> mausg@mail.com wrote:
>
>> Case A. You have a shotgun. fire it at something, slight `ping',
>>  nothing happens.   What do you do next.
>
> 	Well first you get a torch and look down the barrels, maybe poke a
> stick down too, then you open it in front of your face to get a good look at
> and replace the faulty cartridge.
>
> 	It shouldn't take too many repeats to qualify for a Darwin award.
>


Incredibly, there are things on YouTube that show actions 
like that, and not all fake.

-- 
greymaus

iD|marrA Raa|fLa 
Ireland

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#162582

From	Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net>
Date	2016-04-17 06:50 +0100
Message-ID	<20160417065048.282dd590bb33e5e7620fc787@eircom.net>
In reply to	#162572

On 16 Apr 2016 20:32:34 GMT
mausg@mail.com wrote:

> On 2016-04-16, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
> > On 16 Apr 2016 10:03:13 GMT
> > mausg@mail.com wrote:
> >
> >> Case A. You have a shotgun. fire it at something, slight `ping',
> >>  nothing happens.   What do you do next.
> >
> > 	Well first you get a torch and look down the barrels, maybe
> > poke a stick down too, then you open it in front of your face to get a
> > good look at and replace the faulty cartridge.
> >
> > 	It shouldn't take too many repeats to qualify for a Darwin
> > award.
> >
> 
> 
> Incredibly, there are things on YouTube that show actions 
> like that, and not all fake.

	Oh I expect it's less dangerous than Russian Roulette - but not
by much.

	More seriously, and never having handled a shotgun, I would guess
that what you really do is break it open in such a way that neither the
barrels nor the breech are pointing at anything that matters at any time
and shake the cartridge out somehwere it won't cause much distress if it
goes off.

-- 
Steve O'Hara-Smith                          |   Directable Mirror Arrays
C:>WIN                                      | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins.                |    licences available see
You lose and Bill collects.                 |    http://www.sohara.org/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#162588

From	"J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com>
Date	2016-04-17 05:12 -0400
Message-ID	<MPG.317d1d8e95c2784498a0f7@news.eternal-september.org>
In reply to	#162582

In article <20160417065048.282dd590bb33e5e7620fc787@eircom.net>, 
steveo@eircom.net says...
> 
> On 16 Apr 2016 20:32:34 GMT
> mausg@mail.com wrote:
> 
> > On 2016-04-16, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
> > > On 16 Apr 2016 10:03:13 GMT
> > > mausg@mail.com wrote:
> > >
> > >> Case A. You have a shotgun. fire it at something, slight `ping',
> > >>  nothing happens.   What do you do next.
> > >
> > > 	Well first you get a torch and look down the barrels, maybe
> > > poke a stick down too, then you open it in front of your face to get a
> > > good look at and replace the faulty cartridge.
> > >
> > > 	It shouldn't take too many repeats to qualify for a Darwin
> > > award.
> > >
> > 
> > 
> > Incredibly, there are things on YouTube that show actions 
> > like that, and not all fake.
> 
> 	Oh I expect it's less dangerous than Russian Roulette - but not
> by much.
> 
> 	More seriously, and never having handled a shotgun, I would guess
> that what you really do is break it open in such a way that neither the
> barrels nor the breech are pointing at anything that matters at any time
> and shake the cartridge out somehwere it won't cause much distress if it
> goes off.

If you're not in the midst of a fire-fight then give it a minute to see 
if it cooks off, if not, then your procedure is right, noting when it 
comes out if it had discharged at all, and if so then you want to clear 
the bore.

In the midst of a firefight other priorities might take precedence.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#162596

From	Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net>
Date	2016-04-17 12:04 +0100
Message-ID	<20160417120446.1b20bea13e41c355745be4f2@eircom.net>
In reply to	#162588

On Sun, 17 Apr 2016 05:12:34 -0400
"J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:

> In article <20160417065048.282dd590bb33e5e7620fc787@eircom.net>, 
> steveo@eircom.net says...
> > 
> > On 16 Apr 2016 20:32:34 GMT
> > mausg@mail.com wrote:
> > 
> > > On 2016-04-16, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
> > > > On 16 Apr 2016 10:03:13 GMT
> > > > mausg@mail.com wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Case A. You have a shotgun. fire it at something, slight `ping',
> > > >>  nothing happens.   What do you do next.
> > > >
> > > > 	Well first you get a torch and look down the barrels, maybe
> > > > poke a stick down too, then you open it in front of your face to
> > > > get a good look at and replace the faulty cartridge.
> > > >
> > > > 	It shouldn't take too many repeats to qualify for a Darwin
> > > > award.
> > > >
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Incredibly, there are things on YouTube that show actions 
> > > like that, and not all fake.
> > 
> > 	Oh I expect it's less dangerous than Russian Roulette - but not
> > by much.
> > 
> > 	More seriously, and never having handled a shotgun, I would
> > guess that what you really do is break it open in such a way that
> > neither the barrels nor the breech are pointing at anything that
> > matters at any time and shake the cartridge out somehwere it won't
> > cause much distress if it goes off.
> 
> If you're not in the midst of a fire-fight then give it a minute to see 
> if it cooks off,

	That makes sense, which implies keep it in position to absorb
recoil for a bit rather than immediately going into fix the problem mode. I
can imagine having it go off just as you are swinging it round to open it
being a tad unpleasant and somewhat hard on the hands and arms.

> if not, then your procedure is right, noting when it 
> comes out if it had discharged at all, and if so then you want to clear 
> the bore.
> 
> In the midst of a firefight other priorities might take precedence.

	Yep, with priority 0 being arranging not to be in the midst of a
firefight as quickly as possible.

-- 
Steve O'Hara-Smith                          |   Directable Mirror Arrays
C:>WIN                                      | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins.                |    licences available see
You lose and Bill collects.                 |    http://www.sohara.org/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#162632

From	JimP <solosam90@gmail.com>
Date	2016-04-17 13:27 -0500
Message-ID	<k9l7hbdbm7h9keq8n5dd093uhkrrqon5ps@4ax.com>
In reply to	#162582

On Sun, 17 Apr 2016 06:50:48 +0100, Ahem A Rivet's Shot
<steveo@eircom.net> wrote:

>On 16 Apr 2016 20:32:34 GMT
>mausg@mail.com wrote:
>
>> On 2016-04-16, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
>> > On 16 Apr 2016 10:03:13 GMT
>> > mausg@mail.com wrote:
>> >
>> >> Case A. You have a shotgun. fire it at something, slight `ping',
>> >>  nothing happens.   What do you do next.
>> >
>> > 	Well first you get a torch and look down the barrels, maybe
>> > poke a stick down too, then you open it in front of your face to get a
>> > good look at and replace the faulty cartridge.
>> >
>> > 	It shouldn't take too many repeats to qualify for a Darwin
>> > award.
>> >
>> 
>> 
>> Incredibly, there are things on YouTube that show actions 
>> like that, and not all fake.
>
>	Oh I expect it's less dangerous than Russian Roulette - but not
>by much.
>
>	More seriously, and never having handled a shotgun, I would guess
>that what you really do is break it open in such a way that neither the
>barrels nor the breech are pointing at anything that matters at any time
>and shake the cartridge out somehwere it won't cause much distress if it
>goes off.

I remember reading of a Russian Roulette player who wanted to impress
the ladies in a bar. He used a clip-fed pistol, not a cylinder pistol,
and killed himself.

-- 
JimP.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#162634

From	Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com>
Date	2016-04-17 13:56 -0500
Message-ID	<nf0m40$7d0$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to	#162632

On 4/17/2016 1:27 PM, JimP wrote:
> On Sun, 17 Apr 2016 06:50:48 +0100, Ahem A Rivet's Shot
> <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
>
>> On 16 Apr 2016 20:32:34 GMT
>> mausg@mail.com wrote:
>>
>>> On 2016-04-16, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
>>>> On 16 Apr 2016 10:03:13 GMT
>>>> mausg@mail.com wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Case A. You have a shotgun. fire it at something, slight `ping',
>>>>>   nothing happens.   What do you do next.
>>>>
>>>> 	Well first you get a torch and look down the barrels, maybe
>>>> poke a stick down too, then you open it in front of your face to get a
>>>> good look at and replace the faulty cartridge.
>>>>
>>>> 	It shouldn't take too many repeats to qualify for a Darwin
>>>> award.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Incredibly, there are things on YouTube that show actions
>>> like that, and not all fake.
>>
>> 	Oh I expect it's less dangerous than Russian Roulette - but not
>> by much.
>>
>> 	More seriously, and never having handled a shotgun, I would guess
>> that what you really do is break it open in such a way that neither the
>> barrels nor the breech are pointing at anything that matters at any time
>> and shake the cartridge out somehwere it won't cause much distress if it
>> goes off.
>
> I remember reading of a Russian Roulette player who wanted to impress
> the ladies in a bar. He used a clip-fed pistol, not a cylinder pistol,
> and killed himself.
>
Darwin in action.

Though, unless there was already a cartridge in the chamber that he 
forgot about before he inserted the magazine, it seems like racking 
the slide would make it pretty obvious that it chambered a round. 
OTOH, I have heard of people doing this with a revolver that they 
weren't familiar with, glancing at it to make sure the round wasn't in 
firing position, and getting fooled because the unfamiliar gun's 
cylinder rotated in the opposite direction than they expected (some 
brands go clockwise, others go anticlockwise).

Not fooled for long, though.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#162640

From	mausg@mail.com
Date	2016-04-17 20:19 +0000
Message-ID	<slrnnh7rto.17u.mausg@Smaus.org>
In reply to	#162632

On 2016-04-17, JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 17 Apr 2016 06:50:48 +0100, Ahem A Rivet's Shot
><steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
>
>>On 16 Apr 2016 20:32:34 GMT
>>mausg@mail.com wrote:
>>
>>> On 2016-04-16, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
>>> > On 16 Apr 2016 10:03:13 GMT
>>> > mausg@mail.com wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> Case A. You have a shotgun. fire it at something, slight `ping',
>>> >>  nothing happens.   What do you do next.
>>> >
>>> > 	Well first you get a torch and look down the barrels, maybe
>>> > poke a stick down too, then you open it in front of your face to get a
>>> > good look at and replace the faulty cartridge.
>>> >
>>> > 	It shouldn't take too many repeats to qualify for a Darwin
>>> > award.
>>> >
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Incredibly, there are things on YouTube that show actions 
>>> like that, and not all fake.
>>
>>	Oh I expect it's less dangerous than Russian Roulette - but not
>>by much.
>>
>>	More seriously, and never having handled a shotgun, I would guess
>>that what you really do is break it open in such a way that neither the
>>barrels nor the breech are pointing at anything that matters at any time
>>and shake the cartridge out somehwere it won't cause much distress if it
>>goes off.
>
> I remember reading of a Russian Roulette player who wanted to impress
> the ladies in a bar. He used a clip-fed pistol, not a cylinder pistol,
> and killed himself.
>

He shold have been working at the low-IQ place.


-- 
greymaus

iD|marrA Raa|fLa 
Ireland

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#162833

From	"3899jk" <3899jk@gmail.com>
Date	2016-04-22 11:29 +1000
Message-ID	<dntd4dFe32gU1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to	#162582


"Ahem A Rivet's Shot" <steveo@eircom.net> wrote in message 
news:20160417065048.282dd590bb33e5e7620fc787@eircom.net...
> On 16 Apr 2016 20:32:34 GMT
> mausg@mail.com wrote:
>
>> On 2016-04-16, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
>> > On 16 Apr 2016 10:03:13 GMT
>> > mausg@mail.com wrote:
>> >
>> >> Case A. You have a shotgun. fire it at something, slight `ping',
>> >>  nothing happens.   What do you do next.
>> >
>> > Well first you get a torch and look down the barrels, maybe
>> > poke a stick down too, then you open it in front of your face to get a
>> > good look at and replace the faulty cartridge.
>> >
>> > It shouldn't take too many repeats to qualify for a Darwin
>> > award.
>> >
>>
>>
>> Incredibly, there are things on YouTube that show actions
>> like that, and not all fake.
>
> Oh I expect it's less dangerous than Russian Roulette - but not
> by much.
>
> More seriously, and never having handled a shotgun,

That's obvious.

> I would guess that what you really do is break it open in such
> a way that neither the barrels nor the breech are pointing at
> anything that matters at any time and shake the cartridge out

That is just how one type of manual shotgun is done.

> somehwere it won't cause much distress if it goes off.

It wont go off spontaneously if it didn't go off when you tried to fire it.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#162798

From	"3899jk" <3899jk@gmail.com>
Date	2016-04-21 20:57 +1000
Message-ID	<dnrq04F1gvrU1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to	#162544


<mausg@mail.com> wrote in message news:slrnnh43e5.18p.mausg@Smaus.org...
> On 2016-04-16, Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> wrote:
>> On Fri, 15 Apr 2016 12:05:59 -0400, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> 
>> wrote:
>>> Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> wrote:
>>>> In article <MPG.317751437839b71198a0c5@news.eternal-september.org>,
>>>>  "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> No, helicopter parenting and parental fear of the big bad world does
>>>>> that.  I suspect that in the modern world my parents would have been
>>>>> arrested for letting me do the sorts of things that I and my friends
>>>>> did.  I suspect that if they knew, _they_ would have been horrified.
>>>>
>>>> Good thing they didn't find out then. Small children need to do things
>>>> that would horrify there parents for normal development. Many adults
>>>> completely forget their childhood, apparently.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I Remember well, I often marvel that I'm still alive, etc.
>>>
>>
>> We were discussing this in the pub a while back...most of the things
>> we did as kids/teenagers are now illegal* or so bound by regulations as
>> to be not worth doing :-)
>>
>> *  Many were illegal then, such as putting a .303 round in a knot-hole
>> in a fence and hitting the primer with a hammer and nail!  Satisfying
>> bang but the bullet didn't travel far.
>>
>
> One thing that I learned about that. A catridge in a gun is activated,
> the ffirst thng happens is that the catridge ssprings out to grip
> the chamber the bullet enters the barrel. That means that if the bullet
> is beeing held by the fingers, the fingers are blown off first, then the 
> bullet
> pops away.

That's bullshit with stuff like 303 cartridges. They don’t
have the the shell explode when its fired outside a chamber.

Doesn’t happen with 22s either.

> Case A. You have a shotgun. fire it at something, slight `ping',
> nothing happens.   What do you do next.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#162789

From	"3899jk" <3899jk@gmail.com>
Date	2016-04-21 20:08 +1000
Message-ID	<dnrn5kFqakU1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to	#162507

"Peter Flass" <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote in message 
news:558344898.482428930.549633.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org...
> Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> wrote:
>> In article <MPG.317751437839b71198a0c5@news.eternal-september.org>,
>>  "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> No, helicopter parenting and parental fear of the big bad world does
>>> that.  I suspect that in the modern world my parents would have been
>>> arrested for letting me do the sorts of things that I and my friends
>>> did.  I suspect that if they knew, _they_ would have been horrified.
>>
>> Good thing they didn't find out then. Small children need to do things
>> that would horrify there parents for normal development. Many adults
>> completely forget their childhood, apparently.
>>
>
> I Remember well, I often marvel that I'm still alive, etc.

Yeah, me too. Not just small children either. As a teenager
were were in to bomb making, and setting some of them
off just inches from our face, behind a heavy wooden thing
made out of tongue and groove floor boards with holes
in it with heavy class inserts and copper fly screen mesh
that we used to watch it go off inches away.

I also managed to have an early experiment with one of
those solid fuel pellets used in the tiny little rocket engines
which I tried putting in a glass bottle filled with pure oxygen
from an oxy acetylene welding set. Still got the considerable
scar on my leg from that one that required lots of stitches.

Damned near blew up the the chem lab in the school holidays
too. Mate of mine's mother was the chemistry teacher and he
pinched the keys. Making trichloretheylene.

Another kid of the same age quite literally blew his hand
completely off because he was actually stupid enough to
try making a pipe bomb by filling a pipe with what he got
out of shotgun shells and held the pipe in his hand in a vice as
he hammered in the powder with some steel rod and a hammer.
We always thought he was a real eejut, even before that.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#162510

From	Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net>
Date	2016-04-15 17:09 +0100
Message-ID	<20160415170944.524b66b6c9836c29865239ec@eircom.net>
In reply to	#162502

On Fri, 15 Apr 2016 11:00:35 -0400
Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> wrote:

> In article <MPG.317751437839b71198a0c5@news.eternal-september.org>,
>  "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > No, helicopter parenting and parental fear of the big bad world does 
> > that.  I suspect that in the modern world my parents would have been 
> > arrested for letting me do the sorts of things that I and my friends 
> > did.  I suspect that if they knew, _they_ would have been horrified.
> 
> Good thing they didn't find out then. Small children need to do things
> that would horrify there parents for normal development. Many adults
> completely forget their childhood, apparently.

	Either that or they remember it, wonder how they ever survived
unmaimed and become determined to ensure that their children never take
such risks.

-- 
Steve O'Hara-Smith                          |   Directable Mirror Arrays
C:>WIN                                      | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins.                |    licences available see
You lose and Bill collects.                 |    http://www.sohara.org/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#162521

From	Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com>
Date	2016-04-15 15:24 -0400
Message-ID	<750516136.482440349.658368.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org>
In reply to	#162510

Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Apr 2016 11:00:35 -0400
> Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> wrote:
> 
>> In article <MPG.317751437839b71198a0c5@news.eternal-september.org>,
>> "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> No, helicopter parenting and parental fear of the big bad world does 
>>> that.  I suspect that in the modern world my parents would have been 
>>> arrested for letting me do the sorts of things that I and my friends 
>>> did.  I suspect that if they knew, _they_ would have been horrified.
>> 
>> Good thing they didn't find out then. Small children need to do things
>> that would horrify there parents for normal development. Many adults
>> completely forget their childhood, apparently.
> 
> 	Either that or they remember it, wonder how they ever survived
> unmaimed and become determined to ensure that their children never take
> such risks.
> 

They were claiming that margarine was better because butter had more
saturated fat.  After a while eating margarine I said "the heck with this,
everybody dies of something" and switched back to butter.  Then they
decided margarine was bad for you, and the latest is that eating fat does
not significantly raise blood cholesterol.

-- 
Pete

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#162527

From	hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
Date	2016-04-15 14:05 -0700
Message-ID	<ef8b64af-ff05-41eb-898b-937f6d3e3fac@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#162521

On Friday, April 15, 2016 at 3:24:46 PM UTC-4, Peter Flass wrote:

> They were claiming that margarine was better because butter had more
> saturated fat.  After a while eating margarine I said "the heck with this,
> everybody dies of something" and switched back to butter.  Then they
> decided margarine was bad for you, and the latest is that eating fat does
> not significantly raise blood cholesterol.

I'm no expert, but I strongly suspect that too much saturated fat
in a diet isn't healthy, and increases the chances for heart disease.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#162538

From	Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net>
Date	2016-04-16 05:15 +0100
Message-ID	<20160416051555.f3dc661f7390c510be8a1913@eircom.net>
In reply to	#162527

On Fri, 15 Apr 2016 14:05:32 -0700 (PDT)
hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:

> On Friday, April 15, 2016 at 3:24:46 PM UTC-4, Peter Flass wrote:
> 
> > They were claiming that margarine was better because butter had more
> > saturated fat.  After a while eating margarine I said "the heck with
> > this, everybody dies of something" and switched back to butter.  Then
> > they decided margarine was bad for you, and the latest is that eating
> > fat does not significantly raise blood cholesterol.
> 
> I'm no expert, but I strongly suspect that too much saturated fat
> in a diet isn't healthy, and increases the chances for heart disease.

	Neither am I but I strongly suspect that too much of anything in a
diet isn't healthy.

-- 
Steve O'Hara-Smith                          |   Directable Mirror Arrays
C:>WIN                                      | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins.                |    licences available see
You lose and Bill collects.                 |    http://www.sohara.org/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#162539

From	Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere>
Date	2016-04-16 03:34 -0300
Message-ID	<87wpnyvz81.fsf@bogus.nodomain.nowhere>
In reply to	#162521

Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes:

> They were claiming that margarine was better because butter had more
> saturated fat.  After a while eating margarine I said "the heck with
> this, everybody dies of something" and switched back to butter.
> Then they decided margarine was bad for you, and the latest is that
> eating fat does not significantly raise blood cholesterol.

My mother grew up before WW I in a very rural place.  Any fat in the
family's diet they produced themselves and a substantial part of the
pork fat went to her grandmother who made their soap.  Fat in the diet
was a treat.

So all her life she liked the fat from beef and pork, lots of fat in
gravy, lots of butter (or, because it was cheap, margerine) on almost
anything, fried bread, bacon & eggs, etc. etc.  In her 90s, an EKG
indicated that she had at some time had a minor, silent ischemic
episode.  She lived to 98, seriously overweight but without a notable
coronary or cerebral event.

Both genes and (I surmise) epigenetic consequences of her early years
accounted for her vitality.

-- 
Mike Spencer                  Nova Scotia, Canada

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#162541

From	Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org>
Date	2016-04-16 07:12 +0000
Message-ID	<slrnnh3pfj.8p5.plan.b@ID-309335.user.uni-berlin.de>
In reply to	#162539

On 16 Apr 2016 03:34:22 -0300, Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> wrote:
>
> Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes:
>
>> They were claiming that margarine was better because butter had more
>> saturated fat.  After a while eating margarine I said "the heck with
>> this, everybody dies of something" and switched back to butter.
>> Then they decided margarine was bad for you, and the latest is that
>> eating fat does not significantly raise blood cholesterol.
>
> My mother grew up before WW I in a very rural place.  Any fat in the
> family's diet they produced themselves and a substantial part of the
> pork fat went to her grandmother who made their soap.  Fat in the diet
> was a treat.
>
> So all her life she liked the fat from beef and pork, lots of fat in
> gravy, lots of butter (or, because it was cheap, margerine) on almost
> anything, fried bread, bacon & eggs, etc. etc.  In her 90s, an EKG
> indicated that she had at some time had a minor, silent ischemic
> episode.  She lived to 98, seriously overweight but without a notable
> coronary or cerebral event.
>
> Both genes and (I surmise) epigenetic consequences of her early years
> accounted for her vitality.
>

Both me and my mother (both country people) have ate everything the
guvment tell us not to all our lives.  Were both pretty healthy and
I'm 72 and my mother is 100, genes are the answer, I think. 

-- 
Stan Barr     plan.b@bluesomatic.org

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#162791

From	"3899jk" <3899jk@gmail.com>
Date	2016-04-21 20:11 +1000
Message-ID	<dnrnbfFrm7U1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to	#162510


"Ahem A Rivet's Shot" <steveo@eircom.net> wrote in message 
news:20160415170944.524b66b6c9836c29865239ec@eircom.net...
> On Fri, 15 Apr 2016 11:00:35 -0400
> Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> wrote:
>
>> In article <MPG.317751437839b71198a0c5@news.eternal-september.org>,
>>  "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > No, helicopter parenting and parental fear of the big bad world does
>> > that.  I suspect that in the modern world my parents would have been
>> > arrested for letting me do the sorts of things that I and my friends
>> > did.  I suspect that if they knew, _they_ would have been horrified.
>>
>> Good thing they didn't find out then. Small children need to do things
>> that would horrify there parents for normal development. Many adults
>> completely forget their childhood, apparently.
>
> Either that or they remember it, wonder how they ever survived
> unmaimed and become determined to ensure that their children never take
> such risks.

Not even possible with that last.

Mate of mine's #1 son ended up with a broken arm after showing
off to his mates riding his bike along the top of a waist height
brick wall in the school in the school holidays.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 14 of 21 — ← Prev page 1 … 12 13 [14] 15 16 … 21 Next page →

csiph-web

Which Books Can You Recommend For Learning Computer Programming?

Contents

#162540

#162544

#162549

#162572

#162582

#162588

#162596

#162632

#162634

#162640

#162833

#162798

#162789

#162510

#162521

#162527

#162538

#162539

#162541

#162791