Well in general it is normally the opposite. Inner breeding between genetically similar individual produces genetically unstable offspring, making mongrels with some very different genes produces the more stable offspring.

"caught" so this was leaked?

Except that the purpose of this experiment was to play with emotions of their users. And upset was one of the expected results.

Except that it is not.

A lot of different species can interbreed, and a lot of animals in the same species cannot.

There are a huge varieties of dog breeds, many cannot viably mate unless through intermediate dog breeds.
Loads of birds rely of feather patterns to keep them uninterested why being perfect genetic matches for interbreeding.
The preponderance of evidence suggests that humans could interbreed with other great apes. We have done it in the past, hundreds of thousands of years ago, and some scientists have stated that there is a decent chance that it would work (the Nazi's got increadibly close to trying).

And yet I think all of these categorizations are correct. Dogs are all quite related and since there is a range there is no anyway sensible cutting point. They have to be the same species or we need a new word to call it. The birds do not naturally interbreed, the is the whole point of the feathers. And just because many of the great apes can interbreed does not make them one giant species.

At the end of the day "species" is a layman term and is used loosely and with great flexibility.

Personally, to me, all of that is peanuts next to random beatings and killings of unarmed, defenceless and subdued people.

That sounds pretty easy to take advantage of.
"Ya, my brother is starting up a finance firm that is doing the exact same thing as you, he says he will pay me 150% of my current salary to go work for him.
According to my contract this means you now have to pay me 50% more than my current contract and I can sit at home and do nothing, or maybe take on a little work on the side under the table"

Hardly sounds fair for the employee. Your career is still stopped cold. And it is never easy to restart a career with a multiple year jap in the middle.

When I was getting prepared for the drivers test I was told that paying attention to the crosswalk signs was a necessary step. I wa told that unless you did that you might be caught unaware of a light change and fail your test.

How does that make any sense? If you are the government and already know the best solution, why not just implement it?

Standing in line for an Ipad 8.5, while you have a box of unopened ones back at your mansion is not normal. It is just a way of looking for applause from the plebs.

Seriously? He cannot get Apple to send him preview builds of their hardware?

Strangely, the punctuation points match the style of the message. Both look like there were written by a 12 year old girl.

What is the legal precedent for taking ownership of a company's assets (without apparently even informing them beforehand) and randomly giving them to some other company to use? How is that even a legal possibility?

These are people who analyze and predict the health of countries. Of course their results are more politically motivated than evidence based. Would it even be ethical to tell a truth that would cause an economic disaster? If economists had known in advance of one of the great depressions that it was going to happen, and releasing the results would of only sped-up the collapse, should they release the information? And it will always be better politically for the government to be just as surprised as everyone else when things go belly up, instead of being the president who predicted, but was unable to solve, the coming collapse.

He had already destroyed his career, parole conditions or not.