You are right, what i was saying is mostly about audio quality. You can not have a sharp fast complex attack on very low notes. No matter what the instrument is. B is about the lowest, after that you need to make drastic equalizations to get that sharpness back. Also the chord structure "widens" it's intervals the lower you go. With B tune, you can barely make fifths. Once octave higher and you get thirds. If you go 7 octaves higher, you can even use seconds... Allthou Bmin9 sounds AWESOME on B, not very pretty or even recognizable, it's just rumble..... But it sounds clearer around E, aka Breath on Floyds Dark Side of the Moon....

I understand where you're coming from, however there are a few things that might really surprise you.

1. Go to 1:23 in the video - that quote is not from the study, it is from an article about the study. You can check the study itself if you want to be sure:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/joim.12251/full#joim12251-tbl-0002

Here are the actual summarised conclusions from the study:
"The results of this study provide observational evidence that avoiding sun exposure is a risk factor for all-cause mortality. Following sun exposure advice that is very restrictive in countries with low solar intensity might in fact be harmful to women's health"
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24697969

These claims are in line with the results of the study. If he was to debunk the study's conclusions he would have to expose these claims as being untrue/exaggerated - which they are not. It does mention in the study something similar, but only in the results section, and it kind of has to because... those were the results. The claims made that are based on the results are appropriate.

2. He talks about how there might be confounders but fails to mention that the study has thought of that, found out the important ones, and adjusted for them. The study adjusted for: comorbidity, age, smoking habits, education level, marital status and disposable income.

3. He talks about how the study had no control group because it is not a RCT - this is a statement designed to mislead people who don't know much about study design. There are a number of different types of studies, and the reality is that many types of studies simply cannot have a control group - this is one of those types. I mean seriously, what control would you use, a group of humans that had to avoid 100% of sunlight for 20 years?? Yes please, sign me up for a 50% chance of being in that group. (edit: ok it looks like @ant will volunteer) Just because a study doesn't have a control doesn't mean the results are invalid, and if he was being less deceptive he would have admitted as much.

4. He states RCT's have shown that sunscreen prevents melanoma and skin ageing. There are also studies that show that these processes happen despite the use of sunscreen. Either way, so what? The research done in the Swedish study looks at all cause mortality - a far more important statistic - it demonstrates that there are potentially benefits of sun exposure that outweigh the risks, a pretty big deal.
A recent article about research showing that damage occurs (albiet at a reduced rate) despite sunscreen use:
http://www.cancerresearchuk.org/about-us/cancer-news/press-release/new-clues-to-skin-cancer-development-show-sunscreen-is-not-enough

Now, how about the statistical significance of the research? The 95% confidence interval for the results of the study does not cross 1 - in fact the confidence interval is well above 1. What this means is that if the same study was repeated many times, the chances of getting a different result are extremely slim.

I think it's special precisely because of the lack of 'showbiz' about it. The Star-Spangled Banner is a really difficult song to sing. It's very rangy and the intervals are difficult to hit. Just presenting it "plainly" is enough of an achievement.

Just read through this whole damn thread. And damn was that tiring. It's been a while since I've spoken up about anything on ye olde 'Sift, and now seems like a good time to do so.

Hi there, I'm a Type 1 Diabetic, and completely dependant on a regular dosage of insulin via a pump. I've been Diabetic for the last 15 years (diagnosed at age 15 during March Break of Grade 9). Thirteen years ago I was put on a pump because I was taking 9 shots a day to try and manage my wildly out of control "beetus". I was on a good diet as well, with few heavy carbs, but my body has a hard time maintaining a good balance of insulin sensitivity.

Now, on to the idea that Type 1 Diabetes can be "cured" or "treated" without insulin... Bollocks. Plain and simple.

Almost two years ago I set it upon myself to get fitter and healthier. I have never been overweight, just the less-than-average amount of fat I would say, but I was bored with how things were going and decided to try something new for my fitness routines; I went 100% Paleo.

Yeah, for almost two years I have rarely (and I mean rarely) eaten anything aside from fruits (one serving a day, two if I'm deserving of it) veggies, nuts and protein. Nothing processed, as little preservatives and chemicals as I can manage (I read *a lot* of nutritional labels when shopping for new foods) and I buy most of my meat and veggies from local farms and farmer's markets.

Has this helped my Diabetes? Extremely marginally. My insulin sensitivity has increased by a fraction... But that's it. Has my pancreas started creating its own insulin? Not a chance in hell.

While doing this whole paleo eating lifestyle I've also been doing a lot of intervals and weight training, and I've made some great strides. But back to the original idea of getting back to "natural" ways of living/eating and "curing" my diabetes? Yeah, no dice there, ladies and gentlemen.

I cannot be without my pump hooked up to my body for more than two hours before I would need to be sent to the hospital. Nothing I have done, with all my dedication, determination, and strong will, has made my Diabetes any "better" than it was when I was first diagnosed. If anything, it has taken more of my time and money and energy to get where I am now, with nothing to show for it from my condition's perspective.

If anyone, anyone at all, thinks they can cure Diabetes Mellitus by eating better and taking better care of themselves I'll suggest this: remove your pancreas and see if your body builds you a new one while you're testing out your hypothesis, because in all seriousness and fairness, that's what it's like to be Type 1. My body killed my pancreas making it a useless, lifeless organ. It will *never* awaken again to produce my own insulin without the help of true science and excellent doctors.

So, you know what I've done, and can take it from me that it will not cure you of your Type 1 Diabetes. Now I want you to tell me what I'm not doing to help "cure myself".

I'm an open-minded skeptic.

... But I'm not so open-minded that my brain will fall out.

Someone should show this video to the alpine resort staff. They seriously need to up the bucket seats and revise their delay timing between units. This should never be allowed to happen in the first place. The persons were in line of sights as he took off and i'm betting that ain't the first time a pussy goes at snail speed if that's the interval.

That being said, a sincere apology were in order, i'll bet he didn't want to ram her that bad, just to give a good nudge to say: "hey, you are dangerously slow!" He did have a certain douche in him, that's for sure, maybe the reason i disliked him from the start. That screaming part, that's what i would've done but after giving the impression of "there's high speed bullet coming, gtfo" just to stop them braking at every turn.. Then would've paused and let some gap form. You have to remember that you can't pause for long or you are the one slowing down the bunch..

All three are at fault here: the resort, the idiot in the front who's delaying 4 buckets and the douche himself.

(the length of the path travelled by light in vacuum during a time interval of 1/299,792,458 of a second)^3 * 10^-3!

That's interesting. In his Democracy in America Vol 2, Chapter XX "HOW AN ARISTOCRACY MAY BE CREATED BY MANUFACTURES", Baron de Tocqueville warned of these dangers (in 1840!):

In proportion as the principle of the division of labor is more
extensively applied, the workman becomes more weak, more
narrow-minded, and more dependent. The art advances, the arti-
san recedes. On the other hand, in proportion as it becomes more
manifest that the productions of manufactures are by so much the
cheaper and better as the manufacture is larger and the amount
of capital employed more considerable, wealthy and educated
men come forward to embark in manufactures, which were here-
tofore abandoned to poor or ignorant handicraftsmen. The mag-
nitude of the efforts required and the importance of the results to
be obtained attract them. Thus at the very time at which the sci-
ence of manufactures lowers the class of workmen, it raises the
class of masters.

While the workman concentrates his faculties more and more
upon the study of a single detail, the master surveys an extensive
whole, and the mind of the latter is enlarged in proportion as that
of the former is narrowed. In a short time the one will require
nothing but physical strength without intelligence; the other
stands in need of science, and almost of genius, to ensure success.
This man resembles more and more the administrator of a vast
empire; that man, a brute.

The master and the workman have then here no similarity, and
their differences increase every day. They are connected only like
the two rings at the extremities of a long chain. Each of them fills
the station which is made for him, and which he does not leave;
the one is continually, closely, and necessarily dependent upon the
other and seems as much born to obey as that other is to com-
mand. What is this but aristocracy?

Then in Vol 3, Chapter VI, "WHAT SORT OF DESPOTISM DEMOCRATIC NATIONS HAVE TO FEAR" he goes on, describing a situation where a democratic nation has become
subject to a despotic government, and when the people give up and stop participating in democracy:

Subjection in minor affairs breaks out every day and is felt by
the whole community indiscriminately. It does not drive men to
resistance, but it crosses them at every turn, till they are led to
surrender the exercise of their own will. Thus their spirit is grad-
ually broken and their character enervated; whereas that obedi-
ence which is exacted on a few important but rare occasions only
exhibits servitude at certain intervals and throws the burden of it
upon a small number of men. It is in vain to summon a people
who have been rendered so dependent on the central power to
choose from time to time the representatives of that power; this
rare and brief exercise of their free choice, however important it
may be, will not prevent them from gradually losing the faculties
of thinking, feeling, and acting for themselves, and thus gradually
falling below the level of humanity.

Or in other words, once you have managed to oppress the people of a democratic nation, the very equality that defines a democratic nation leaves them powerless and unable to organise together and throw off their chains.

That mock up looks great. Could it be made to cycle on a 10 second interval?

Look at the keyboard, starting at middle C, which is a white key. All the keys in C major are white keys, so going right from middle C, the keys are named: C, D, E, F, G, A, B, then C again an octave higher.

The simplest way to hear the difference is to play a C major chord, which is the first, third and fifth notes of the scale: C, E, G. Just hit all three at the same time and you can hear they have a certain sound together - call it majorness.

In a minor chord, on the other hand, the middle note of the chord (the third, E in the case of a C chord) is flattened -- so, instead of hitting the white E key, you hit the black E-flat key to its left, while keeping the same C and G. You can hear those notes also have a certain sound to them - call it minorness. Go back and forth between the major and minor chords and you'll start to hear the difference.

Here's the thing: scales are based on the *intervals* between the notes in them. C to D is a full step, or just a step. D to E is also a full step. D to E-flat, on the other hand, is a half-step. So the major scale goes like this:

Step, step, half-step. Step. Step, step, half-step.

Notice how the first part and the second part of the scale are identical, with an additional step separating them? Now try flattening the third note of both parts to make a minor scale:

Step, half-step, step. Step. Step, half-step, step.

That's the minor natural scale. Starting at C, it goes: C, D, E-flat, F, G, A, B-flat, C. If you start from a different note, you transpose into a different key and end up with different notes being sharp or flat, but the major- or minorness of it still comes from the interval pattern.

Anyway, what they basically did was take the flattened third (E-flat) and seventh (B-flat) and raised them a half-step while leaving everything else the same. Boom, it sounds like a more upbeat song. Cheers!

Good point about evidence based arguing.

Looking at this tv news segment (which is not a study):

It has a non-random sample - they put out word that they were offering training - only those interested will reply and they are all from a similar age group (a university is a non-random place).

It has a statistically insignificant sample size of 6 - it needs about 100x that many participants to have confidence level of 99% with a confidence interval of 5.

It doesn't have a control group.

Basically it is almost meaningless.

LOL. More music theory humor: http://videosift.com/video/Django-Bates-Interval-Song

http://videosift.com/video/Django-Bates-Interval-Song

http://videosift.com/video/Django-Bates-Interval-Song

Just that the typical user who does zero regular maintenance also believes that antivirus software with 3-year old definitions is still effective. And is likely to click Allow for any random "Do you want to run this .exe?" they download from the internet. (and they probably don't change the oil in their vehicle at the recommended intervals either)

>> ^messenger:

What does dust have to do wıth viruses?>> ^spawnflagger:
I have seen worse. Usually they come from houses that have 5+ pets, and the PC is sitting directly on the flooor (usually a thick carpet), and the computer hasn't been opened or cleaned once in it's 8+ years that it existed. The hardware probably still works, but I can guarantee it has several viruses.
And there are lots of things you could still do with a P4- run a webserver, or fileserver for backups, etc. Just put Linux or BSD on it. I agree that you aren't going to sell it for $50, because I'm sure there are many other places one could get them for free.

Yeah. All those world class skeet shooters are really retarded, too. Cause this is sooooo easy to do.


In reply to this comment by westy:
Tis video / show is retarded.

the clay pigoin is shot at the same trajectory each time so the guy just has to launch the ball at a certain time interval after launch into the same position.

obviously that's still hard but you would hope that sumone that throws balls all day for a living could do this.



the program makes out that he is working out where to throw the ball and aiming at the target when in reality he could be blind folded and told to throw the ball at a spot a certain amount of time after a noise and you would get the same result.