My running form improved greatly, and quickly, when I ran barefoot (or wear 5 finger shoes). Doesn't have to be far, could be a few hundred meters as a part of a warmup. If you're overstriding, slamming your forefeet or heels, it'll hurt. When it stops hurting, you're running with good form.
Finasteride, from what I've read, can have side effects that are worse than the hairloss. I'll take a receding hairline over ED.
OP: Cut it short, shave it all if it's thin, get a thicker neck (serious. It's the biggest improvement you can make to your dressed appearance, in terms of muscles, and often overlooked), and you're better off than most guys with Fabio-hair.
I clicked it at work. We're in a temporary space with a few dozen 3 and 4 person offices, all have floor-to-ceiling walls and doors. The acoustics are pretty good. Even the loud talkers are tolerable, for the most part.
When we had an open office... the acoustics were terrible. Conversations at a normal volume could be heard far away, conference calls were (had to be) done on speakerphone with the volume maxed out to hear. It looked great, but it was awful for everyone who didn't enjoy talking very loudly.
Hoping that the new space has head-high partitions, maybe offices for each team with floor-to-ceiling walls, a ceiling with either pockets to reduce echoes or a proper ceiling.
An office built for working with the people we work with, not being able to talk to someone 50 feet away without walking.
uh... "most physically fit males - especially ones of Brown complexion - are armed to cause serious physical harm"
It's a good idea to rephrase that.
edit - yes, a lot of black athletes have lower body fat than whites, hispanics, and asians. No, they're not "especially" armed to cause serious physical harm.
It has nothing to do with Brown being black. It has everything to do with him being 193 cm male weighting 95 kg. It is fascinating how discussion of something having zero to do with race suddenly turns into discussing "black athletes" vs. "whites, hispanics, and asians".
There are three types of "good architectural choices"
The first: The ones that can be made after the original, bad ones. The second draft, which is an improvement in the first draft, in every field.
The second: His (or her) own. We all know there are developers out there who think they're the greatest thing to ever write code, and that everyone else's decisions are bad.
The third: The ones that really should have been made, in place of the ones that really shouldn't have been made. As in, "You wrote your own SQL parser using hardcoded strings and no grammar parsers?"
You sound average-sized, if you can confidently say shirts are standard in size. I know a lot of guys who have a hard time finding shirts that fit.
Shirts, jeans, sweaters, anything... they're all over the place in terms of fit.
With shirts, you've got different torso widths, lengths, arm hole sizes (I don't know the word), depths and widths of the neck hole. A slim fit, an athletic fit, a relaxed fit, will all vary from brand to brand.
With jeans, same thing.
Then you've got the fabric and stitching. I'm not sure I'd buy clothes online. Too many variables.
Cool idea, but how do you account for variations on what certain brands consider a 33-length, for example?
Like for example, 32-waist Wrangler seems to be equivalent to 30-waist Gap. Only way I know this is because I tried on the jeans at the mall and found those to be the most comfortable on me.
The variation is strange and it's not just pants but also shoes sizes aren't consistent between brands either. I think the way Zappos solves this is they send you the shoes and you send them back if they don't fit well.
There would need to be some brand research done, checking the fitting and sizing of various brands, so you could know that "with a 31 inch waist, measured around the navel, I would fit in 30 inch Gap jeans and 32 inch Wranglers."
That trip to try on those two pairs of jeans cost you what, an hour? two hours?
Yeah, I found a stain on the shirt I'd intended to wear to a funeral. Went to a Kohl's and found exactly one white dress shirt in the store that fit me.
I might be missing what you're not following, but here's a quick explanation (and a reason why it's not a concern)
Correct username, correct password: takes 30ms to execute the code
Correct username, incorrect password: takes 15 ms to execute the code
Incorrect username: Takes 7 ms to execute the code.
You fuzz usernames, you get one that takes 15 ms, you know that's a valid username. You then start working the password.
Not necessary on most systems, because we're working at speeds that are measured in nanoseconds, and since we're using networks for many attacks, the delays are unpredictable and measured in (at least) milliseconds.
I understand how the timing attack works. I don't understand how it's a justification for hiding usernames. "You need to try to hide A because if you're not careful they can find A."
If anything the timing attacks weaken the argument against hiding usernames.
Everyone's talking about Terry like he's not able to see this...
Not aiming this message at you, krapp, or anyone, I just realized this while reading your message that Terry's probably read through this thread a few times. Wonder what his thoughts are on the article.
Heads up, limit poker. They've solved a two player game with restricted bets.