@Trancecoach

I never said people don't have self control, but if it were as simple as "eat less and exercise," no one would be unhealthy or obese. Instead, we're looking at a majority of the population that's overweight.

http://www.nourishinteractive.com/system/assets/general/images/nutrition-facts/portion-control-larger-portions.png

I'm not saying that it's the only reason for weight problems, but as the original article I posted points out "No one eats one and one quarter of an apple." Portion size increases provide correlative data that coincide with weight problems in developed countries. I've yet to see any data that suggests that people in the world, collectively, suddenly have less self control.

I'm no dietician, but I'd say that the low-fat food crazes of the 1980s and 90s played a role as well: http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/low-fat/

Typical low-fat options replace the fat (and protein in some cases) with sugar which is burned quicker by the body.

I could go on and on, but I stand on the position that it's NOT just a simple matter of self control. AND even if it is, people have varying levels of self control that need to be accounted for: http://cess.nyu.edu/caplin/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/Measuring-Self-Control-Problems.pdf

Surely, you don't think everyone has the same level of self control as you?


Edit: One last thing, sometimes people rely on food labels to restrict their diet and come up short because nutrition facts are often unreliable: http://nutritionovereasy.com/2011/04/can-you-trust-the-nutrition-facts/ Self control without good information is a bad mix.

I used the 2012 budget (~$3.8T, look it up wherever), the most recent figures for total income and total taxes paid of the top 1% (which are from 2010) from the Tax Foundation, which are $1.52T and $350B, respectively, so I did a little rounding. So you can adjust my $1.2T to $1.15T, if you want.

The top 1% in wealth owned 34% of the US's total wealth, in 2007, according to Wikipedia citing a Forbes article citing this article which cites this paper by Edward Wolff of NYU. The 2010 numbers cited are 35%, but I rounded down to 30% to be safe. Then I just looked up the total US household wealth--which is harder to do than you might expect.

Wikipedia reports ~$54T for the total US household *and non-profit* wealth in 2009 (Graph), which gets its data from the Federal Reserve. If you go to p. 104 of the 2011 document, you can see that this went up to $60T. I don't know how much of that is non-profits and how much is households, so I looked at the Census data.

Unfortunately the most recent is from 2007, which is pre-crash but which gives the mean household wealth as $556k. There were about 110M households in 2007, so that gives us about $61T total--but this was pre-crash. So we can kinda compare with the Wikipedia chart and see that in 2007 the total household+nonprofit wealth was $66T. So let's just assume ~$5T is nonprofits, so households had around $50T in 2009 and maybe closer to $55T in 2011, give or take. 30% of $50T is $15T. I had made slightly higher estimates before to get my $16T (didn't see the 'nonprofit' thing there).

So all told, the data's from the census and the Fed, and I'm kinda rounding down everywhere I can. I did some extrapolating here and there because I can't find a consistent data set from any year after 2007, and it wouldn't be fair to your side of the argument to use 2007's numbers. If you can find better data or if there's something egregiously wrong, please correct me.

From TPM:

The “controversy” around President Obama’s 1990 speech at Harvard on the occasion of the late Professor Bell’s decision to take a leave of absence to protest Harvard’s hiring practices is shameful in what it implies (full disclosure — Professor Bell taught me Constitutional Law at NYU during his self-imposed exile from Harvard).

The implication is that Professor Bell was some kind of violent radical racist. Professor Bell was a HERO who dedicated his life to desegregating the United States. From his job as the only black lawyer in the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division in the 1950’s, to his work alongside Thurgood Marshall bringing hundreds of desegregation actions in Mississippi, right up to his leaving Harvard, Professor Bell lived what he preached. That his life’s work was radical or provocative says more about how far we have left to go. If its radical to be appalled that Harvard Law School had no women law professors and only five black male law professors among hundreds of professors, then the world could use a lot more radicals. And to tarnish his reputation as simply anti-white is false and totally and intentionally missing the point. I hope to see President Obama speak about Professor Bell, in prime time, on all networks, if for no other reason than this was an American hero that more people should know about and take inspiration from.

for a few years, I was a friend of Lang's daughter.

(and I think I met Elvis Mitchell, as well, at the NYU Tisch School.)

>> ^marinara:

No question that the active part of the molecule is the F.
http://saturn.med.nyu.edu/files/mylab/wang/pdf/Zhou-LeuT-SSRIs-2009.pdf

"All SSRIs possess halogen atoms at specific positions, which are key determinants for the drugs’ specificity for SERT"
"The SSRI halogens all bind to exactly the same pocket within LeuT."
That said, Fluoride isn't a drug. Putting fluoride in the water to make people happy is just crazy.


Seriously, just because a chemical has some fluorine atoms, does NOT make it the same as sodium fluoride. Every study (a massive three of them) mentioned on that page is talking about sodium fluoride or aluminum fluoride. There has never been any legitimate evidence that Flouxetine has anything remotely similar to the behavior of either of those. Look for actual peer-reviewed research, not the crap you get from conspiracy sites.

No question that the active part of the molecule is the F.
http://saturn.med.nyu.edu/files/mylab/wang/pdf/Zhou-LeuT-SSRIs-2009.pdf
"All SSRIs possess halogen atoms at specific positions, which are key determinants for the drugs’ specificity for SERT"
"The SSRI halogens all bind to exactly the same pocket within LeuT."

That said, Fluoride isn't a drug. Putting fluoride in the water to make people happy is just crazy.

Can't wait for this...and the episode where Matt and Trey go to NYU to teach a writing class.

>> ^Psychologic:
>> ^SuperHotbUNZ:
I knew it would boil. I did not know it would freeze.

Actually, below .006 atm liquid water isn't stable... it either freezes or boils, depending on the temperature. If they had left it in the vacuum then it wouldn't have frozen. As said above this is what happens to a person tossed out of an air lock in space, and it is also closely related to the damage deep-sea divers experience if they surface too quickly.
Another interesting property of H2O is that adding pressure to ice at just under the freezing point (and above .006 atm pressure) turns it back into water, where as most substances freeze under increased pressure.
♥ Chemistry


Phase diagram for general fluids: http://www.teamonslaught.fsnet.co.uk/co2%20phase%20diagram.GIF

Phase diagram for water: http://www.cims.nyu.edu/~gladish/teaching/eao/water-phase-diagram.jpg


These diagrams show what you're describing. Notice the line separating solid and liquid. Under general fluids, the line tilts to the right showing that when pressure is added and temperature is constant, the phase of that fluid will move from liquid to solid. But for water, the line is tilted to the left, showing that with increased pressure at a constant temperature, ice would turn to water

http://cs.nyu.edu/~jhan/ftirtouch/


So basically Apple saw multitouch, stole it and now it counts as their innovation? Isn't that pretty much what Microsoft did?

"I'm an NYU student, so it's nothing new when a movie is being filmed near campus, as was the case today. Walking past with my friend, we wondered what movie it was, as it was clearly high budget. I remarked that it was probably another crappy Nicolas Cage movie. My friend stopped to ask a cop, who excitedly said "The Sorcerer's Apprentice with Nicolas Cage." This killed us, as we could tell from the title that this would be another instant classic."
-- Mike, New York

ahn...
My name is Renato. I´m 'pregnant' of my first daughter, which we´ll call Lucia.
I´m 33, age of dead christs.
I have two cats, Mao-Tse-Tung and Lacan , who brighten my days and nights.
They like to break things.

I live in Sao Paulo, Brazil and am a partner at a 3D animation company, TSI, doing work mostly for advertising and architecture.
I´m originally a journalist, but went to grad school in NY, on the (in)famous ITP - Intergalactic Telecommunications Program, or something similar. I miss NY.

I like to write when I am procrastinating more serious work, but videosift is getting in the way of that. I love to snowboard, despite the fact that after a motorcycle crash and some time at the hospital, the doctor forbid me. Still I went for ten days at Whistler and after two months I was back at being almost ok. Worth it. Now I sold the bike to pay for all those diapers to come.
(queue music: Gogol Bordello - Undestructable)

This is amazing. I thought the joke would peter out quickly, but it manages to be hilarious the whole way through. Nice work, NYU boys.

I think a classmate of mine at NYU film school made this film back in 1998 or so. Japanese filmmaker. Quite talented.

Not so much a dupe as it is mislabeled. I'ts supposed to be a wooden-mirror. There's one on display at NYU. Pretty sweet.