Greenpeace was trying to do what is illegal to attempt to do, there is no remedy possible if they fail.

BP was doing something which was legal to attempt to do, partial controversial remedies are available if they fail. BP failed, and were less than willing to remedy.

Clearly, one is much more malicious than the other at the very outset.

The infamous "nature" fallacy.

Public schools, found abundantly in nature, hanging on to trees, swimming with octopuses in the oceans, are greatly afflicted by an non- natural bane called vaccination.

Religion can induce people to believe anything - including the horrors of vaccine. Notably, definitions 6 and 8 here
explicitly allow for this, many other definitions and interpretations do so to some extent too.

They can be idiots where they don't endanger my children. Some hardship in return for endangering my children is pretty reasonable.

Installed since Alpha, using full time since Beta. No major issues - just lxdm user switch doesn't work. Hope it is fixed in final release.

Switched to lightdm, so not checked lxdm issue yet.

I tend to agree, but a question nibbles me. When, if, it all becomes paywall, the tracking will be far more complete? It is possible that each website will manage its own paywall mechanism / data, but isn't it far more likely that it will be outsourced to 2 or 3 companies which will handle paywalls for 97â of websites?

Firefox to the rescue. It has become an awesome Android browser in other ways too, and comes with the repository with ad blocking extensions, privacy enhancing extensions, and send to be reasonably secure.

Wake up. The "Web" did become unusable long ago. Without adblock, anyway.

Only ever seeing malicious ads is not the issue - ever seeing malicious ads is the issue. FYI, one malware is one malware too many.

The addon user did not give explicit permission to the advertising companies to do business with the website through himself. Websites generally don't even have EULA. If they then are prevented from doing this questionable business through non-consenting parties, that should be fine.

How is "foreseeable" (by you) future relevant? The topic is future, not your prejudices.

You didn't read my post, did you? I am saying that the more precisely we measure intelligence, and the more types of intelligence we measure, the more certain it becomes that we find differences. Differences could be in at least one measure of central tendency, OR at least one measure of variation; of at least one type of intelligence.

Why is it acceptable to set out to "prove difference" between rice of Asia vs Africa?

Not exactly.

Doesn't follow. While both parts 1 and 3 of you sentences are correct, the "so" doesn't fit at all. Are you saying the vast majority of non-exotic pizzas in the world are acceptable? Or non-exotic-ness causes acceptability? Both are pretty difficult positions to argue for.

Ok, so assume no special needs like allergy or restricted diet. Still, all non-exotic pizzas don't taste similar - cheese and tomato both are non-exotic yet taste wildly different from each other.

Only low quantity of toppings and leeching flavour and taste from toppings can cause pizzas with different toppings to taste similar. Non-exotic-ness is a factor with pizza hut but it doesn't fit with your post at all.

Success rate may not really mean much. It could also mean :

1. Toppings are in such small quantity, that too with flavour leeched out of them, that non-topping-ingredients might decide the majority of taste / satisfaction.

2. 98% say they liked their pizza after ordering this way - but maybe they would have liked any pizza? There needs to be a control group which is served the pizza that the algorithm finds least "good" for them. The very fact that they chose to order this way might mean they are not particular about which pizza they want.

At least, there needs to be a control group with random pizza ordered for them. Press release, being a press release, is short on details.

And more importantly, if there turns out to be a difference between some intelligence measures in the millionth decimal point, of which you don't deny the possibility, it does indeed "prove" the difference in intelligence. Even though there is another measure of intelligence in which the other race turns out to be more intelligent.