The most likely thing to lead us to 'global war' is comparing Putin to Hitler without any sane reason to do so.

I can see every app requiring a password and approval for all purchases.

That alone will hurt the model.

This seems to have implications in that whole free-to-play space. I wonder if anyone is worried about that angle?

So they're leaving the EU?

Seems unlikely.

So, what's the end game here, for Germany?

And why chastise the US publicly when you could manipulate them through false information instead?

What are the implications here?

I think that's a legitimate TOR angle, actually. In order to leverage the law you need to know where they physically are. TOR hides that, per design.

There's a case here, folks.

TOR is inhibiting legal remedies.

It's always nice when someone self-identifies as someone who doesn't know what the fuck they're talking about.

Had this been the case, there Revolution would have been depressingly short and unsuccessful.

Because the opinions of AC's matter...

Well, three problems:

1) Their users provide the feed. Facebook just displays it.
2) It isn't 'for free' as Facebook uses the data to advertise to you, and thus earns money on the content you generate.
3) The example I gave was explicitly not bullshit - if it were, why would anyone interfere with it?

Facebook's efforts to manipulate the feed are really disappointing. If they'll do it for jollies, then they'll damn sure do it if someone pays them to or if the government orders them to.

Imagine an 'American Spring'. Imagine the government not only spying on Facebook users communicating about it, but requiring that Facebook actively suppress any positive comments about it.

That shit ain't right.

I covered that part already.

"Just leave it alone and give it a chance" isn't so difficult a standard for reasonable people to apply. Note, too, that this doesn't inhibit contraception in any way.

If your pill only targets those zygotes that would have been lost anyway, then I can see no problem with it.

I'm willing to limit the conversation to 'in the womb', but the point still applies. Also, we don't allow the killing of unwanted infants, so your logic stumbles a bit.

This assumes that either:

A) Government is immune from private sector influence.
or
B) The private sector's behavior was in any way surprising.

Both are pretty naive. At least we all know better now, right?

Right?

Anybody?

You're focusing on the wrong aspect. It isn't about potential, but human potential. The same as eating meat is allowed, but eating human meat is not. This is largely because nobody wants to be eaten.

However rudimentary it is, if left alone it will most likely develop into a human. Same as you did when you were in that rudimentary stage because nobody interfered with your genetic material.

Note, too, this is why many of us don't object to funding primary education even though we don't all have kids. We received such an education, and wouldn't have wanted it taken away due to lack of funding.

So while the nervous system makes a fine line for certain arguments, in general it's the 'what if this happened to me' angle that makes human-material issues most unique.