Having recently lived in Tokyo gave me a new perspective. I always struggled with losing weight in North America, but once I moved to Japan the weight came off very quickly. What I think were the main contributing factors: 1) I walked everywhere, walked upstairs/downstairs at stations and work. 2) Small portions - your stomach gets used to ever-expanding portions. Portion control is unfortunately necessary. Miso soup is amazing for expanding rice in your stomach and making you feel very full for incredible low number of calories. 3) Good calories - There is, of course, processed foods in Japan, just not as in-your-face. Most grocery stores are super small and in your local market. Some only carry fresh produce and fish and meat. I cooked every meal in Japan. I did so in Canada too, the difference was that a lot of Japanese dishes are boiled / steamed instead of fried. I told one of my clients about Eggplant Parmesan and he looked nauseated. I picked up a Japanese cookbook and learned that they lightly boil/steam their eggplant. 4) I've heard that the more sugar you eat, the less flavor you can taste. I cut out all sugar while in Japan (except for alcoholic drinks - yum). For me, it was true that I could really taste food again. It's a hard sensation to describe something you hadn't been sensing before but were all of a sudden attune to. I have a feeling that this extra sugar leads to MORE extra sugar to taste said sugar and also to increased levels of 'flavor' in dishes. I've heard that the Japanese like their flavors subtle. This is definitely the experience I had in downtown Tokyo. Anyway, it worked for me - I went from 135 lbs down to 112 lbs. Now, back in Canada, I notice advertisements for HUGE portions of everything. Last anecdote, I got a Tall latte from the Starbucks in Shinagawa station and while walking to work I ran into a client who commented on my coffee, laughing, saying I had a big appetite. Considering a "Tall" is no big thing here, I both blushed and was taken aback. After that I really reconsidered if I needed so many fat and calories in my diet - don't we always upsize only because it's just a better deal, not because we actually want more food? Just my thoughts!

Well, TV's have already hit the 1080p pinnacle, Blu-Ray won the format wars, and the whole HD-media-over-wireless... Yeah, well, I've yet to hear about it panning out in a cost-effective form while retaining decent quality along with the tech being over a year or two old now, so I guess the media covering home theater needs something to tout as the Next Big Thing (TM). Until viable high-quality, consumer holographic displays show up along with a viable need/demand in the mainstream market, this is the most interesting thing I've seen in regards to 3d type stuff. And even that is old by internet standards.

To be honest, I've not watched any "new" 3d movies. I've heard that it looks really nice, but then you also need to wear the glasses--srsly, I already wear specs. Hate them, don't want another pair. As far as in home theaters, do you need a special tv that can display it? Or does the movie have to be specially formatted for 3d? Either way, it sounds like paying at least a small (per movie) to large (for a special tv) amount extra over the non-3d version. Until I watch such a film and find myself in need of a fresh pair of pants and my ambulatory extremity undergarments expelled from my personage via sheer amazement, I remain skeptical.

Actually, the grandparent post is totally right.

First, because English is defined by customary usage: if, for instance, a majority of English speakers start pronouncing a word in a different way, then that pronunciation will become valid after a while. The shift could also occur semantically. The French have the Académie française, the Germans have the Rat für deutsche Rechtschreibung; but for the English tongue, there exist no such academy.

Secondly, one should not forget that language is by no means systematic. Take the word "anti-Semitism," for example. We all know it means "hatred towards Jews." Now, let's decompose that word for analytical purposes:
- anti- means "against"
- Semite means "Semitic-speaking person"
Woah, wait... Arabic — among other languages — is also a Semitic language. So why has the word "Semite" come to specifically designate Jews? For the same reason we call the United States "America" or the Caribbeans, the "West Indies."

So, the bottom line is: in linguistics, pragmatism often wins where logics ought to prevail.