There is a good evolutionary reason for a longer period of menses.
Most mammals do not have a menstrual cycle. They have an estrus cycle, in which the endometrium is resorbed by the body and not shed.
In animals with an estrous cycle, there are overt signs that they animal is ready to become pregnant. and they generally only accept a mate when they are fertile.
Primates will accept a mate at any time in their cycle, and there are less overt signs that a female is ovulating (there is a lot of debate as to how well primate males are able to detect ovulation).
Menses solves this problem, as it gives a visual indicator of what point a female is in her cycle. The male just waits until he stops seeing blood, and then knows that the next week and a bit is going to be the most fertile time
You know I wish we could control our flow like we can our urine. It would be so nice. No more napkins, pads, cups, or tampons. Life would be good.
Just gonna drop this here….
would you rather have a period every day or two like poopin’? OR hold your poop in til the 28th day then poop for 4-7 days?
A more likely be explanation is that at the end of your period ( just before the commencement of blood) the endometrium is thick and plump. The loss of hormones causes the blood vessels supplying this tissue to spasm and die. Then the endometrium sloughs off (mental image) slowly as if part of your legs was declined it’s blood. Slowly your toes would fall off one by one, never all the piggies at once!!
It isn’t against the law, but if you get caught with that much cash the authorities see it as a ‘red flag’ of illegal activity.
The legal significance of 10k in cash is that anything purchased greater than that amount has to be directly reported to the IRS.
Well, it’s not really illegal, but people get weird when you buy things in lots of cash.
I bought my triumph motorcycle with 20 dollar bills…all $14,000 worth.
I did it for fun, took the money out of my ATM $500 per day. Nobody ever said anything, but the sales guy seemed a bit nervous when I said OK, I’ll take it, and started pulling wads of cash out of my messenger bag.
I also withdrew $12,000 from my account one day (to move it to another account at a different bank) and they gave me a form to fill out. When the form asked what it was for, I wrote in “strippers and beer.” The teller looked at me like I was a psycho but didn’t say anything.
It’s not illegal to trasnport more than $10,000 in cash. Check out this link from the government CTR Reporting Info
edit for more info:
What is the Currency Transaction Report? A report that must be filed with the IRS for currency transactions valued at more than $10,000, or multiple transactions if they result in cash in or out totaling $10,000 during any one business day, and the financial institution knows these transactions are by or on behalf of any one person.
Why file a Currency Transaction Report? The CTR is required by the implementing regulations of the Bank Secrecy Act (See 31 CFR 103). The Act is: (1) A federal law enacted in 1972, and subsequently amended, to detect and prevent money laundering by creating an investigative paper trail for large currency transactions and imposing civil and criminal penalties for noncompliance with its reporting requirements; (2) Federal legislation that requires banks to report cash transactions that exceed $10,000 in any single day and requires the bank maintain certain records (copies of checks paid, deposits, and so forth). The act is intended to inhibit laundering of funds obtained through illegal activities.
I have a friend who keeps around $50k-$70k in his house as a disaster and emergency fund, he’s been saving it for years. He was stopped during a. Move once and they found the safe and asked to see inside. He showed them and they asked why, he said because if the banks go down, or the power goes out, or some crazy thing happens and i need cash i have plenty of it. They ask took a count of it and snapped a pic of a bunch of random bills (for the serial number I’m assuming) and sent him on his way. He never heard anything after that about it. That was almost 4 years ago. So moving it doesn’t seem to be an issue. Also he is black and so were the men helping him move. Not a word about drugs or illegal things were mentioned the entire time.
Reminds me if this:
Mistake costs dishwasher $59,000.
It is set by the Treasury Dept. If you move more than $10,000 the bank is required to file a report with the T Dept.
It is designed to minimize drug trafficking and terrorism support.
The real reason is to make sure that you are reporting your income correctly.
There really should not be an issue providing the cash a most banks. The reason most of our tellers would question it is that you would get hit over the head and someone would steal it from you.
Source: was an SVP at a bank and had to take the stupid Patriot Act test.
This was actually created in 1970 under the Bank Secrecy Act. That is when Fincen was founded to catch money launders. They set the limit at $10k since that how much money was in a stack of $100’s. All banking institutes must report to FINCEN anytime someone enters or exits the bank with over $10k in a single day. If you try to be clever and go to multiple branches technology today will pull all that info and you will be reported on. The whole process was setup to watch the flow of currency. While there are many good reasons to have that much cash on you, wholesalers, check cashing stores or buying a car, there are other ways that it is not normal. If every two weeks you are walking into a bank with $50k in cash but your occupation is waiter, then things look suspicious. Your bank can file a Suspicious Activity Report (SAR) on customers who seem to be doing illicit things with cash or their accounts. If a SAR is filed on you then law enforcement can subpena those records as a way to build their case. On an average day there are upwards of 100,000 reports filed to Financial Crimes Enforcement Network a day. A majority of those have no further action taken.
You may remember a year or so ago HSBC got into hot water for not reporting large currency transactions that led to funding terrorism.
Now if all this makes you unwary, don’t fret if you ever have a report filed on you as long as it’s for something legitimate. Besides what is the most cash you’ve ever really had to have on your person? For me it was $5k which is under the reporting limit.
Reference:I work in Financial Crimes for a bank.
Consider yourself lucky that you are still allowed to deal with $10,000 cash.
Governments around the world are looking to eliminate cash transactions as they do not create the records that are required for modern surveillance and tax collection.
France currently has a limit of 3000 EUR and intends to lower it to 1000 EUR.
In Italy, cash transactions of 1000 EUR or higher are illegal.
In the United States, the Treasury has previously required banks to report transactions as low as $750 under the Bank Secrecy Act source
Your grandchildren probably won’t even know what cash is.
It’s not illegal. There are professional gamblers, couriers and other people that sometimes carry more than that. You DO however, have to be ready to provide legal documentation as to the origin and purpose of that money. The same applies to entering or leaving the United States with large sums of money, as per Title 19 of the United States Code, Sections 482, 1467, 1496, 1581 and 1582; cash, checks, money orders or any other monetary instrument.
Reference: I’m a Federal Agent with the Department of Homeland Security. I work at a major border crossing area in Southern California.
$10K is an arbitrary amount chosen by our government, above which you’re considered a possible money launderer and/or tax evader. There are all sorts of laws and regulations on the books requiring people: 1) declare when they transact more than $10K in cash; and/or 2) explain in writing where the cash from in a currency transaction report (“CTR”).
CTRs are required when a person deposits $10K in cash in a bank, spends $10K in cash on a purchase, and attempts to enter or leave the US with $10K in cash.
It’s not illegal to transact with over $10K in cash. However, you generally have to sign the CTR under threat of criminal sanction that your explanation is true. If at some later point a law enforcement agency reviews your CTR and finds out you provided false information, that will be bad for you. As an FYI, structuring your transactions to “get around” the limit is inherently suspicious.
also say you won like $100,000 in vegas. is there any safe way to transport it out of the state without the danger of cops pulling you over and confiscating it?
Ironically, to get around this requirement the new form of illegal drug money transfer is in store gift cards or prepaid visas. You can have hundreds of thousands in a small suitcase and then load them remotely over the web from offshore accounts. The cops can’t do anything because the cards are blank/empty crossing the border and are loaded later.
Well chief, we searched the car in and out and can’t find the money anywhere.
Boys, we’ve got nothing. We have to let him go.
Little did they know, they money wasn’t hidden in the car. The money was the car. I drove my way out of town and sold it for a pretty penny.
- if you carry more than $10K across the border, you must report it.
Any cash transaction of more than $10K with a financial institution must be reported. This is a CTR (cash transaction report) that the bank may flag as a STR (suspicious transaction report). A bank may be punished for revealing that it filed an STR.
Structuring transactions (eg, taking out $6K twice) is severely illegal, but potentially un-provable unless you yap too much.
Carrying any amount of cash in the US is legal, but ‘they’ can confiscate it and force you to prove that the origin is legitimate, giving you a limited time to do so. It may revert to the local law enforcement authority. The expense of recovery can exceed the value of the money, especially if you are traveling.
The amount was $10K in 1986 (the start of the requirement). It was as good as anything else. This would be $21K today, so inflation has lowered the reporting threshold by a factor of two. The odds of this being inflation indexed are basically zero, because CTRs are automated (zero-effort) and WHY ARE YOU SUPPORTING CRIMINALS?
Why? Money laundering, the general belief that financial privacy is not a right, and the desire of law enforcement for an ever-growing Panopticon. Any form of privacy that is not interpreted as Constitutionally enshrined will be inevitably eroded.
how DARE you not voluntarily tell the government all of your personal business!
I hate waking up early. Tired eyes, stiff muscles, and a yearning for coffee similar to that of a junkie and his next fix. This is always worse the earlier I wake up, doesn’t matter if I’ve had 10 hours of sleep or 3.
That being said I almost always force myself to get out of bed early. After that initial crappy “wake up” phase the early mornings are brilliant. The fresh smell in the air, the sun rise, birds chirping… And everything else is quiet. Not to mention it feels fucking awesome to get a shit load of stuff done before 11:00am.
Of course this usually means I’m exhausted and ready for bed by 10:00pm. Yep, I’m 26 years old but purposefully maintain sleeping habits similar to a 60 year old because I like fresh air and birds.
This might seem like a non-serious answer, but this is what I do and I assure you it works.
Basically what I do is to take the Barney approach to waking up. As in, instead of feeling tired and shitty, just stop feeling tired and shitty and be awesome instead. It’s all about learning to control your emotional state. Just give a big stretch, and put a giant shit eating grin on your face and say “Good Morning” out loud in your most annoyingly chipper and enthusiastic voice.
I learned this technique when I was backpacking through Europe. When you’re hungry and tired and your pack is too heavy and your idiot friend booked a hostel that’s over a mile from the nearest bus stop, you can either be grumpy and miserable, or you can… not be those things.
Really no other way to describe it. It’s all about self control.
yes. As I got older I became my father. I am now up by 6 all the time and get most everything accomplished before 9. It’s amazing at the quiet and ability to get crap done before the day starts.
It’s at least 50% hereditary according to sleep researchers, and no amount of trial, self-discipline, or compromise will change the inner clock.
Source: Strawbridge et al, 2004. Impact of Partner’s Sleep Problems on Partners.
You can however change your sleep schedule and reset your circadian clock by simply camping without electronics for a week. Otherwise you’ll have to use discipline. You’ll adapt to whatever sleep schedule you demand of yourself, but that won’t mean you’ll become a morning person (and all that that implies).
I have a sleep disorder called delayed sleep phase disorder (DSPD). For me this basically means that getting up in the morning is really, really hard. It would be like you (or a person with normal sleep patterns) having to wake up at 2 AM everyday.
Our bodies have several biological rhythms or cycles. One of them is called the circadian rhythm and it’s responsible for sleeping and waking. It’s typically a 24ish hour cycle. There are changes that happen in your body during the cycle… Things like body temperature and hormone levels. Especially important is the hormone melatonin. It’s responsible for the sleepiness you feel when your ready to go to sleep.
So the reason why you can change time zones and after a couple of days fall back into your normal sleep/wake times is that your body’s circadian rhythm can “reset” itself because it responds to light stimulus. One of the most effective ways to wake up is to expose yourself to bright light. That basically tells your melatonin to gtfo and you can feel awake again.
So what makes someone a morning person? Genetics mostly. They determine how your body responds to stimulus. Some people are morning people (larks), some are night people (owls) and some are in between. It has been argued that there was an evolutionary advantage to this… A night watch sort of thing. It strikes me as a bit speculative though and I can’t remember where I learned that so take it with a grain of salt.
DSPD is where your circadian rhythm is so out of synch that being awake during “normal” times really fucking sucks. Additionally many people with DSPD tend to have a much harder time waking up when their body isn’t ready to. So someone like me could probably never become a morning person. A normal person has a much greater chance of shifting their wake time though. Here are some tips:
- Pick a bed time about 7-9 hours before you want to wake up. Dim all lights roughly 3 hours before bed time.
- Roughly 45 min – hour before bed stop using screens. No phone, computer, or TV.
- The bed you sleep in should only be used for sleeping and fucking. No hanging out in there.
- Once you lay down to sleep, if you can’t fall asleep within 30 minutes or so, get up and hangout in a different room. Keep lights dim. Read a book or listen to a boring podcast or something. No fun for you. After about 20 minutes try to go back to sleep. Repeat.
- When you wake up in the morning, turn on ALL OF THE LIGHTS. Go outside if it’s light out. Take a quick walk or something.
Do these for a couple of weeks and you should be able to shift your sleep/wake times and feel pretty chipper in the morning.
So, all mammals have a circadian cycle, which is a biological cycle that lasts roughly 24 hours, which leads to changes in your body throughout the day. Certain hormones are higher in the morning, activity levels are different, appetite changes, etc. This cycle is set off every day by light hitting the retina. This sends a signal to a part of the brain called the suprachiasmatic nucleus (SCN), which is the “master clock” of the body. That master clock sends signals to the rest of the body, basically saying, it’s a new day, folks! Time to get going!
That being said, your body has it’s OWN cycle. That light stimulus in the morning is a reset button to make sure that cycle is on track, but if you take it away, you’ll still have a cycle that lasts about a day. This is found by putting a human (or animal) into continuous low light, continuous light, continuous dark, etc. Without that first morning light, called the zeitgeber, hitting the retina and telling your body to start the day, you start to free-run, or run on your body’s own physiological rhythms. The length of one free-running cycle without a zeitgeber is known as T, or tau. Everyone’s tau is a little different, most are slightly over 24 hours long but some are less.
Take a look at this figure from Pilorz et al 2014 (http://www.cell.com/current-biology/fulltext/S0960-9822(14)00195-X) to see what I mean:
Just pay attention to the top row. This is activity over 24 hours (double-plotted, so each row in the graph is two days of activity), with time on the X axis, each tick is an activity count. In the first graph, you can see that the animal is behaving pretty close to tau = 24; it’s waking up and moving around at about the same time each day. The second graph is an animal with tau>24; it’s waking up a little bit later every day, so you see a positive shift in the activity. The third graph is an animal with tau<24; it’s waking up a little earlier each day, resulting in a negative shift. (There’s a light shift in there as well, kind of like when we turn our clocks ahead/back an hour, but just ignore that, this is just an example.)
So let’s take someone who has a T of 24.5. This doesn’t seem very far off, but what it means is that every day, when your alarm clock goes off at 6AM, your body thinks you still have half an hour left before you’re supposed to be awake. This makes you NOT a morning person, you’re constantly trying to play catch-up with the clock. Someone with a tau of 23.5, however, will be able to wake up just fine, might even be up before the alarm, because their body is telling them the day already started.
It’s certainly possible to become a “morning person” through behavioral means, like just going to bed earlier, or by reducing light exposure in the evenings, but there isn’t any scientific evidence that you can change your tau. If your tau is over 24, you’re always going to have a tough time getting up. Sorry.
I have this phrase as a life rule:
“The only thing that holds one from doing something is not doing it”
It’s fucking obvious to death.
It is probably due to your personal sleep cycle.
Just go to bed at like 11 and wake up at 6/7 everyday for a couple of weeks. Keep your blinds open so the sun wakes you up as well.
Then before you know it, you will be fine in the morning. Also stay away from caffeine when you wake up.
Not sure about being a morning person (that’s mostly biology + age), but I know you can become a light sleeper by repeatedly having your alarm go off during the early mornings. 4 AM, 4:30, 5, 5:30, 6… after a few days of this you will not sleep the same.
It’s all about melatonin!
Short answer, yes.
Here are some tips I’ve found over half a military career. First of all, there is no substitute for practice, as in all things. The first day of waking up early hurts. Personally, I find that getting up before the sun is exceptionally painful, so start by waking up a few minutes after dawn, assuming you have the option.
The three best things to help me wake up are sunlight, oxygen, and water. Leave the blinds open if you can, or open them up immediately upon waking. You’ll never be able to wake up is you stay in a dark room. Upon waking, immediately take several deep breaths. You’ve been breathing shallow all night – get your lungs full of air, and get the blood pumping. Get some sunlight into your eyeballs ASAP. It works like magic! Your body will instantly stop fighting against waking up.
Hydration is so important. If you’re dehydrated when you go to bed, you’ll be screwed in the morning. So guzzle a quart of water before bed. Hopefully you’ll have the added bonus of a full bladder that won’t let you stay in bed. When you get up to take that morning piss, guzzle some more water.
If you’re a coffee drinker, get a pot with a timer and set it for your wake-up time. It’s much easier to get out of bed when hot coffee is waiting for you.
During the day, be mindful of things like caffeine intake, workouts, and eating dinner so you can get to bed on time.
Good luck, OP!
I don’t know.
But leaving caffeine behind helped me become more of a “morning person.”
Excellence is a habit. Just get used to it and eventually it will become routine.
I turned into a morning person by making myself go to bed by 10:30pm. I wake up usually before my alarm (6:15am). The downside is I can’t sleep in no matter how hard I try.
In brief genderqueer is someone who does not ascribe to a binary gender.
Sex being the anatomical sex you are born with gender is the way society expects you to be as a member of that sex. The way men and women are expected to behave based on the fact of them being men or women. Such as men don’t shave their legs but women do (simplified example).
These two genders are are called the gender binary.
Genderqueer people feel they do not fit into this binary and do not want to be one or the other gender.
So you could be perfectly happy being in the male sex but not the male gender or any other variation. Hope that explains it.
Source: I’m genderqueer.
Edit: This kind of exploded when I went away from the computer, sorry for derailing it with an overly simplistic answer, thanks to everyone who gave fantastic answers in my absence 🙂
As I imagine it, gender queer is a great term for those that don’t care to identify as either. Whereas Trans people identify specifically as one, just not the gender they were born into it.
It doesn’t have anything to do with sexual orientation, although, I imagine you’d have to consider yourself as pansexual to be attracted to someone who identifies as gender queer.
A new word for the old word: Androgynous, but with a slightly more specific definition as to how it applies to self-identified sexuality.
it seems to me were mixing some semantics in our descriptors… should it be :
male/female = biological
man/woman (masculine /feminine) = societal/gender identity
heterosexual /homosexual = sexual preferences
example: i am male (penis) /gender queer(eschewing traditional gender roles) /heterosexual (prefer females sexualy)
is this correct?
The rules for this subreddit say “Only give explanations from an brutally unbiased standpoint. Full stop. If you cannot avoid editorializing, soapboxing, debating, flaming, or arguing, do not post.” (my emphasis) The problem with trying to answer this question while following these rules is that the word “gender” as it’s used in this context is inherently subjective. It only refers to personal experience, so how can one be unbiased?
That said, here’s my attempt to describe the phenomenon, and please correct me if I’m off-base: “trans” and “genderqueer” are modern Western concepts used by people who are experiencing intense dissonance between their own natural inclinations / desires / abilities (sexual and otherwise) on the one hand, and the expectations that parents and others have of them because of their sex. Choosing to identify yourself as “trans” is one rather radical and risky way of bucking those expectations, attempting to adopt instead those of the opposite sex. “Genderqueer,” then, would be something you’d choose to identify yourself as if you feel you must reject the expectations that accompany both sexes in your society. The problem with these terms are that most people in society don’t accept them, or even know them. So at this point, it’s only a successful strategy within that segment of the population who’s open to it. Whether that is going to change, only time will tell.
Side note: a common assertion from the genderqueer and trans people that I know is that if we had more than two gender identities available (e.g. Thai “ladyboys”), then overt rebellion from these norms, i.e. being “crazy” (as many of the commenters have stated or implied genderqueer people are) wouldn’t be necessary, because there would be ways of being that work both for the individual and the society. It could be argued that “gay man” and “lesbian” are becoming a third and fourth “gender” in Western society currently, with their own sets of expectations for behavior.
TLDR People who identify as “genderqueer” pretty much don’t quite seem like dudes but don’t quite seem like chicks either, so they’re trying to find a third way.
Ok, I’ll preface this by saying- genderqueer is a term initially meant to be empathically descriptive and respectful, but has been co-opted by all manner of armchair SJWs for all manner of malicious or discriminatory purposes. As a result, you’ll have a lot of hostile response to this both by those who’ve been targeted by such audiences, and those who don’t believe in thoughtful/person centered language and prefer hard empirical and/or group centered language. It’s also specifically regarding gender as a psychological label/social construct and not as describing physical parts, as one would in anatomy and harder sciences.
It helps to grasp this if you think of both sexuality and gender (IN PSYCHOLOGY and not physical anatomy) as separate but related attributes, sort of like each one is an axis on a graph. Sexuality predominantly deals with which groups a person is attracted to. Gender has more to do with how someone individually feels and identifies as male and/or female relative to the society they’re in- modern psychology treats this more as a gradient (or an axis on the graph) that leans toward one or the other, INSTEAD of just describing it as ‘male’ and ‘female’.
Here’s why this approach is the popular one: the things that qualify as ‘male’ and ‘female’ personality traits, if we were to try and empirically categorize them, would be based on society’s subjective opinions (sociology) so instead it’s become a popular notion to treat gender as something purely personal and to cease trying to predict it to the most precise detail empirically. We rely on others to tell us how they feel about their gender, how they identify it, something admittedly subjective, because even if it is totally opinion, it’s still a more ‘worthy’ or ‘reliable’ source of data than asking society at large (still subjective, cultural barriers, a major anthropological thing)- it’s an ethical matter, personal identity priority versus that defined by larger society.
If a person feels like they’ve always been male or female, or lean enough toward one end of that gender gradient, they identify with that gender. While sexuality is fundamentally different, sexuality can also influence someone’s gender perception too.
So if someone doesn’t feel that they lean enough toward one gender to truly feel comfortable calling themselves one or the two, genderqueer is a word to describe that. Transgender being a wider label for someone who’s gender identity is opposite than it used to be, and/or has physically changed sex (again- not necessarily the same thing, but definitely related), genderqueer seems more specifically to deal with not really being comfortable having a preference. Since it’s not so empirical a word, lots of other similar words have become the norm to describe both gender and sexuality. Genderfluid, for example, is meant to describe someone who feels like they identify more as one gender one day than another, as opposed to the kind of consistency genderqueer implies.
So short, summarized version: try to see gender and sexuality as describing fundamentally different ideas that are related to each other, and both as having their own gradient (scale) instead of just being ‘male’ or ‘female’. Because we all sorta get ‘gender’ as a psychological idea, but can’t so reliably empirically categorize it at all times, the best path tends to be trusting the person identifying honestly as the gender they feel. ‘Genderqueer’ is rising social/person centered word to describe one self if they’re not comfortable using the words ‘male’ or ‘female’ alone to describe themselves.
ELI41…I have never heard of this word and learned something interesting today
Genderqueer is a catch all people who do not identify solely with their birth ~~gender~~ sex.
You can trademark a brand, not a recipe.. I think that’s the gist of it.
Common food and food ingredients are not legally protected. I can’t make my own Fried Chicken, declare it a “MashCaster Special”, and then claim Popeye’s is infringing on my property. But this also means I can take certain ingredients, mix them together and end up with something that tastes quite similar to Dr. Pepper. I can’t sell it as Dr. Pepper, but I can give it my own brand name and sell it. This is what Wal-Mart does with a lot of products,
Typically store brand items are made by the same company that produces the name brand item. For example, I forget which one, but either Kroger or Walmart brand yogurt is actually Dannon just with a store brand label.
For a five year old:
Your friend Bobby has just created this really cool color by mixing paints and he doesn’t want anyone else to know how he did it. Everyone else starts mixing paints to get close to the same color as Bobby but it’s never exactly the same color. Bobby doesn’t care because he knows he and everyone else knows that he is the only one who can make that color. Eventually someone finds out exactly how to make the color through trial and error, this makes Bobby mad so he complains to the teacher who tells Bobby there is nothing that can be done.
Now Sally on the other hand Found out how to make paint sparkly by adding glitter. She tells the teacher and everyone else how to do it on the condition that no one else will do until the end of the month to which everyone agrees. But sally finds out that Pete lied and started adding glitter to his paint so she tells the teacher and Pete gets in trouble.
For an adult:
The first story is an example of Trade Secret which has it’s own set of rules. But if a trade secret is found out through legitimate means then it is perfectly legal. While the second example is that of a Patent where the creator is able to reserve the right of production for a set period and afterwards anyone is allowed to manufacture it. Also the teacher is the Government.
There are different types of intellectual property protections. Preventing someone from making a product that you designed falls under the protection of patents. The idea here is that if you come up with a new design (an invention) then you get to be the only one who makes that design for some period of time. In exchange you have to tell everyone how you did it. The idea here is to encourage people to invest in coming up with new ideas.
Store brand items are pretty much never covered by patents—the time to patent “sugar, water, carbonation, and flavoring” has long since come and gone, if that was ever a patentable idea in the first place. Using your personal favorite ratio of those ingredients doesn’t give you something new enough to patent. Same goes for pretty much any product. It’s always things that have been around for a long time.
Since patents aren’t going to get in the way that leaves the other two areas of intellectual property: copyright and trademarks. Copyright protection serves a similar purpose to patents, but it covers creative works—writing, music, pictures, etc. You get to be the only one who can sell your creative work for some period of time, but after a while the copyright expires and the creative work goes into the public domain—anyone can use it. (However, copyright protection keeps on getting extended, largely thanks to Disney trying to protect their old works). The idea here is that the producer of the creative work gets to profit from their work, but eventually things go into the public domain and anyone is free to take the work and build off of it (much in the same way that Disney built off of the public domain work of, say, Cinderella).
Copyright isn’t even particularly relevant to generic brands, so that only leaves the final protection: trademark. Trademarks serve a different purpose from patents and copyright entirely. It’s not about encouraging people to produce more stuff (inventions or creative works); it’s about trying to make it so that consumers know what they’re getting. If I buy a 2-liter bottle with a red label and the scrawling white letters with two bit “C”s on it then I expect to get Coca-Cola. There’s a certain quality that I expect from that label. If I get it home and taste it and it tastes like crap then I’ll be upset because I was misled.
The goal with trademarks is to let companies build up a reputation that consumers can trust. The Coca-Cola Company goes to great lengths to ensure a consistent quality in their products, which consumers come to rely on. If someone else makes a product that is packaged with the same markings as real Coca-Cola but with a lower quality then it will sell off of Coca-Cola’s reputation which is then damages.
Thus, the defining test when evaluating trademark claims is “would a consumer think that they are getting the trademark owner’s product when they actually aren’t?” Dr Thunder may be packaged in a generally similar color to Dr Pepper. They both use names that start with Dr. However, they are different enough that consumers will not buy Dr Thunder and think they’re getting Dr Pepper. Thus, there is no trademark violation.
It’s likely that the store brand is being made by the brand-name company, too, but even if it’s not there is still no intellectual property infringement. You could start your own company and make “Mountain Mist” soda that gets sold in a yellow/green bottle. You can even copy the recipe for Mountain Dew completely (if you can get your hands on it) and there’s no infringement.
Are you saying that Dr. Thunder is not a totally uniquely invented product?
Sometimes it IS the name brand companies making them.
A lot of the times, the suppliers of the “No Name” product are the same suppliers of the named product.
For example: Coca-cola makes it’s own cola, wal-mart approaches Coca-cola and asks them to develop for them a similar Cola Product under the Wal Mart brand.
Coca -Cola agrees to do it, tweaks the formula a smidge and sells it to Wal-Mart. Either way the company wins.
If Coca-cola says no, then Wal-Mart tenders the business out to Say Pepsi.
What I found since graduating and working is that everyone is in bed with everyone and everything I learned is shit.
Dr. Thunder taste way off than Dr. Pepper. I bet in wide blind study people would pick DR. Pepper. Provided it have not sit on the shelf that long. It has smooth creamy overtones that Dr.thunder can not reproduce. Any FYI the original coke formula was found in a old news paper. I am going to make it at home and see how it comes out.
This is the reason why Aldi is doing so well in the UK. I Read an article about it actually, I’ll try find it.
It’s an article in the Daily Mail so I can’t promise that there won’t be racism:
Brand names are NOT the inventor of a product they are merely the most successful or most common version of a class of item.
Oreo’s, for example, aren’t the original chocolate and vanilla cream cookie they are merely the most successful version.
How do generics “get away with it” the same way the “brand names” do. They don’t own the idea or concept just the name. Cola existed long before coca cola. Cola is named after the kola nut which was an ingredient in the early stuff. Pepsi is named after pepsin, an ingredient in their original recipe. Dr. Pepper is named after you guessed it Doctor Pepper a dentist.
All colas are based on common patent medicine recipes for tooth ailments or in the case of pepsi stomach troubles.
Generic drugs are out of patent. Because they are a new creation they can be patented but patents expire and the genetics copy the now public domain patent.
Some of you are missing the bigger point. The store brand items are just that. Store brands. Therefore they can set the prices to whatever they like, which is generally more competitively priced than name brands. The name brand has a couple of choices at this point. Accept that, or not sell at that store. I can promise you coca cola, or Pepsi won’t pull their product off their major retailers shelves because that is where they get a ton of revenue.
You can change a few ingredients and re release it as a new product.
Generic (private label) products are often made by the manufacturer of the branded product.
Actually, anyone can try and copy Dr. Pepper, Coke, and even KFC’s herb and spices recipes. These are considered trade secrets and are not protected by law of copying. If you actually went in to one of these manufacturers and stole the actual recipe, then you would be breaking the law. But you can try and copy anyone’s recipe and sell it as your own.
But the key is you cannot steal any of their copywrited or trademarked material. For example, Dr. Thunder name or Sam’s Cola name, instead of selling it as Dr. Pepper or Coca Cola.
A trade secret, unlike a patent, trademark, copywrite, is only protected by the company/person keeping that secret. Once the secret is out it is no longer protected.
I am sure I missed some details, but this is the jest of it.
“About 72% of veterans are at least 50. It is not surprising, then, that the VA found that people in this age group account for 69% of veteran suicides — or more than 15 of the 22 per day.” – Alan Zarembo, LA Times
Most did not serve in combat in Iraq or Afghanistan.
Its better reported than in previous wars.
Transition time from battleground to civil life was way longer. Troops came back by boat and had weeks to deal together with what they’ve been through, what they where going back to, discuss it at length among soldiers and build some closure.
Getting thrown all alone into civil life immediatly after a few flight hours, directly back from an hostile battlefield, makes the shock all the more violent IMO.
Past wars had more deaths in combat. The “war on terror” has had about 5k deaths in over ten years. The Korean War had 33k deaths in three years. The Korean war doesn’t even have a “high” death toll compared to other wars like WW1, WW2, Vietnam, etc.
Combine this low death toll with real reporting and statistics on PTSD, post-combat suicide, etc.
War has also changed. Despite stupid quippy sayings. There used to be infantry charges, conscripted troops, clear enemies. Now most days are spent in an outpost or in a vehicle, most deaths are to random attacks and small scale ambushes (including mines/etc).
Society has changed. Half a century ago you come back from a war without a college degree you can get a “real” job, stay with that company for years/the rest of your working life support a family, buy a house, and “live the dream”. Now if a person shows up to society at 24+ without a degree they are going to be stuck working retail barely able to pay for living expenses.
Basically its a combination of all of that. We notice it more, less people are dying in war, more people are living with really bad injuries, its hard to come back to society and “prosper” than it used to be, and war is arguably mentally harder now.
I don’t think it’s that the rate of mental health issues is higher, I think that it’s because the rate of combat deaths is much lower.
The US sent around ~500,000 men to Vietnam, and around ~50,000 died. In comparison, we sent around 100,000 to Afghanistan, and 2,000 died. Proportionally, that’s five times as many combat deaths, which is absolutely staggering. So, while it’s scary to say “more veterans have killed themselves than died in combat,” we’re talking about a war where, relatively speaking, very few died in combat. It’s hard to compare, really.
It should also be noted that those figures that the article is citing do include veterans of other wars (mostly Desert Storm and Vietnam, presumably).
Being a veteran has SIGNIFICANTLY hindered my efforts to be part of society. For one, there’s always the dreaded “did you kill anyone” question… If you say yes, then you’re a cold-hearted baby killer. If you say no then you didn’t really serve your country. Then come employers. They see you as a liability, or a tax break. Depending on what your MOS was, you’re either a tax break with everything to prove, or you’re a huge liability and they found someone else better qualified for the job (don’t even get me started on jobs that REQUIRE any sort of pedigree). Finally, the training itself. When you’re in the military, you are REQUIRED to become institutionalized. Guess where else you get institutionalized? PRISON. The mindset of the average vet is that of “always guilty until proven innocent”. This is the way it is in the military. Everyone who deals with you will see institutionalized behavior right off the bat, and will make every assumption that you are dangerous in one way or the other before they actually get a chance to see how awesome of an individual you are.
I don’t regret having served for a second. I’ve had a few friends off themselves for the stupidest reasons (and I miss them dearly). But when you’re down, and you’re around others who like to kick people when they’re down, the thought does cross your mind. Better to die with honor than without dignity.
edit: I did not “service” my country. I served. 😉
As an Infantry Marine veteran from OIF 1, 2, and 3, I have lost 12 of my brothers to suicide. Every one of these Marines and I were recovering at Wounded Warrior Battalion – West (on this day, 11 years ago, I was resuscitated after being caught in an 1.55 mm artillery shell blast, so it’s my Second Cakeday) and all of us were diagnosed with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, in addition to our other wounds. I won’t go into how devastating these events were, but here is what I learned:
A LOT of us are coming back from this war. Our body armor, superior technology, no draftees, etc.; thankfully, these factors have allowed many of our service men and women to come back home. However, there is a huge spike in “wounded” personnel among those coming home. I put wounded in quotes because I include PTSD in that category and, sadly, there are many that do not consider suffering from PTSD a wound. I’m not going to get into any debates about this, but just know that I feel PTSD is a wound.
If you get shot in the arm, and Doc isn’t around to patch you up, there’s still a chance you can survive. You’re back from patrol and you decide now is a good time to talk to Doc. Problem solved. The end.
So let’s say you don’t get your arm patched up, let’s say it’s not a big deal. Your arm heals however much it can and you carry on living. In essence, you ignored your wound. Yah, you survived. But your arm will never be same.
Replaying the scenario, arm shot, “tough guy” attitude, don’t get patched up; but this time your arm gets infected. Your symptoms worsen, you’re freaking out on the inside, but you’re “tough”, you’re a goddamn Marine. You drink to fight the pain, but the infection is spreading. You just can’t take the pain anymore. The infection kills you.
Sorry about that….what I’m trying to say is that you need to treat the wounds. Shot in the arm, cause of death: Infection. PTSD, cause of death: Suicide.
TL;DR: more wounded survivors, more depression
Semper Fi 0311
While it’s true that suicides are better tracked now, I believe that Viet Nam produced as many or more suicides, given the number of troops who were there and the unpopularity of the war. For a perspective on soldiers , from both sides, who returned home, I would suggest reading “The Good War” by Studs Terkel. He writes in an oral interview style that gives insight into why and how WW2 returnees coped.
Separation of battle and the decreased veneration of war. In olden times you marched for a month or more on your way back from battle, compartmentalizing the difference in landscapes. Now, youre in iraq and within 20 hours home in your bed. Shit fucks with you man.
Better reported. Depression is recognized as a bigger issue now(as a disease). After WW2 they came back to jobs and didn’t experience the sudden slowdown.
Poor reporting. Most of the suicides are happening in troops that have never left garrison/seen combat.
No one really knows why garrison troops are killing themselves in such high numbers, but the current thought is there’s a lot of toxic leadership because its become so hard to remove leaders in the .mil
I found this article helpful. http://articles.latimes.com/2013/dec/20/science/la-sci-sn-veteran-suicide-statistics-20131219
There is poor funding for programs to help veterans when they come back to the states. War is hell. And a lot of them don’t have the resources on their own to learn how to deal with the horrors they’ve seen.
One significant reason is that there is an extraordinarily low number of US deaths, as compared to wars in the past.
The US is very willing to use tactics and equipment to prevent it’s service members from being killed to an extent that is extraordinary compared to most wars in the past.
Some of that means a high reliance on drones, cruise missiles, stealth bombers, to take out targets that other military forces of the past would have been forced to throw large numbers of infantry at.
It’s not that suicides are spectacularly high by any historical measure – It’s that combat deaths are extremely low. (Plus better attention is being paid to mental health issues among vets, so we are catching more of them than in the past.)
Because there is no goal.
“Pub” is short for “Public House”. It used to mean a place where anyone could stop in for a pint. Pubs serve food, bars don’t. Also, and this is a small detail, Irish Pubs tend to be named after people (McHale’s, O’Conner’s) where as English Pubs tend to be named a bit more creatively (The Dog and Duck, The King’s Goiter, The Stag and Cock).
That’s the main idea, pubs are bars with a family atmosphere.
A pub is somewhere you should feel comfortable to spend the whole day and even take children during earlier hours. It should be a cosy place, decorated in a friendly and welcoming manner, if a little naff. There should be games available such as pool, darts and a quiz machine. The better ones will even have dominoes, chess and backgammon sets behind the bar. There ought to be a jukebox around with the entire Led Zeppelin discography or at least get the lads to bring their guitars and fiddles and we’ll kick up a tune ourselves.
If you’re there at lunchtime hours expect pies, fish & chips and a half-decent tikka masala to be available, if your in during later hours than you’ll have to make do with crisps, pickled onions and Scotch eggs. If you’re good mates with the landlord, however, he may be willing to make you a sandwich when you’re absolutely tanked at 1.30 am.
If the pub takes even the least amount of pride in what they do there will be a good choice of real ales such as Hobgoblin and Old Tom served at cellar temperature as these actually taste of something unlike near-frozen mass-produced lagers. The good ol’ water-of-life should be in abundance be it Irish, Scotch, Bourbon or otherwise. In short, a pub is the very focal point of civilised society.
A bar, on the other hand, is a truly dreadful place. Tastelessly decked out in chrome, pine and mood-lighting, this hell-hole is full of wankers from the City getting shitfaced on shite like Bud and Kronenburg whilst listening to god-awful repetitive pop music at near deafing volumes.
Englishman here. I don’t think there is an official definition.
The bar is the actual place where the drinks are served. All pubs have at least one bar in them.
You can put a bar anywhere, for example in a restaurant or cinema.
Most if not all of our pubs have been pubs for a very long time, i.e. they were at one point a proper old Public House and there is still a drinking establishment in that building to this day.
New drinking establishments which spring up tend to get called bars because they ain’t in a building that has previously been a pub.
So all pubs are bars, but not all bars are pubs is pretty much spot on.
In Scotland a pub is anywhere that sells alcohol that isn’t a restaurant or nightclub. However, the term ‘bar’ is also used. There are no rules, but ‘bar’ is generally used to describe a new/shiny/posh ‘pub’ (with no guarantee of a seat!) usually in towns and cities, not country places.
Pubs are usually quieter and more comfortable places to drink, (in cities or villages) but i don’t think you would be be corrected for calling a bar a pub, or vice versa. Pubs sometimes have a separate bar and lounge area, traditionally men stand at the bar and drink, and women and couples sit in the lounge and drink – you still find this in some local pubs.
However, pub is the most commonly used term to describe any form of meeting mates and going to the pub for a few, regardless of what establishment you are going to.
There is little difference today but in 1830 a law passed which allowed anyone who paid for a license to sell beer and cider from their home, making their home a public house.
Just FYI when you say the place you go is a “free house” this means it isn’t owned by a brewery. If you were to visit the UK in London you might go to a Fuller’s pub, in Manchester a Hyde’s pub Birmingham a Mitchell and Butler’s. But all over the country you’ll find Wetherspoons Free Houses which serve beers from various brewerys depending on their current contracts.
I think the best description I’ve heard is that a pub is “The neighborhood’s living room”.
pubs in my home-town generally have an open fire. nothing better than stepping out of the rain to be welcomed by the sound and warmth of roasting hearth and a pint of cider.
It’s like what the one dude said about porn. I can’t specifically describe what a pub “is” but I know one when I enter one.
In the US a pub is a bar that someone decided to call a pub because they went with an Irish/English theme.
If you ask for a cocktail in a proper pub, you will be spat upon.
For me, you can feel the difference in a pub and a bar.
To me, a pub is an inviting place. Very warm. Very friendly. Great cheerful atmosphere.
A bar CAN be warm and inviting. but it doesn’t have to be.
Also from that AMA: Pubs are an English tradition. It’s not that other cultures do not have something vaguely similar, it’s just that they come from a history unique to Britain. In the US, it’s essentially just a branding idea. Pubs and bars are, for the most part, interchangeable (YMMV based on individual States). For example: in Indiana, where I currently live, all bars must be able to provide food. Even if they have no intention of offering it to guests. One of my favorite places in Indianapolis (White Rabbit Cabaret) has a stockpile of 5 year old Hot Pockets and boxes of Cheerios in the back room that will never get eaten. This is because the law in Indiana says you cannot sell alcohol exclusively — you must be able to also serve patrons food.
A good pub has levels. Small rooms, open areas, multiple bars, upper areas, discreet nooks and crannies. Even modulating the elevation by a single step can make a world of difference in look and feel.
Pub is short for Public House, it’s where you would get your food and your drink.
A Bar is just a bar, it’s just for drinks, sometimes some nuts.
Lounges are often times watered down pubs as in they have food, but not usually full meals, just appetizers and what not.
Already answered in depth above but the TL;DR I like the most re: Pubs is that a good one should function as a neighborhood living room.
Read a book, have a beer, enjoy a good conversation without having to scram over Pitbull & Lorde.