for example if you begin watching a show on Netflix on your laptop, then switch to a Roku set-top box to finish it
I don't get this.
When I'm watching something I enjoy, either via OTA HD or Netflix, the last thing I'm going to do is "quick! switch to another device!"
Watching a film, documentary or "episode" is much more enjoyable watched in one sitting. If I have to switch to another device I will watch at a later time when my attention isn't split.
This splitting of attention ruins the experience.
I suspect that income and education level could be relevant here as a proxy for other dietary trends. People with higher incomes tend to eat better quality food overall than poor people. People with higher education levels also tend to make different dietary choices (and are probably more likely to seek out more "natural" foods or whatever the current research is pointing toward).
You can always tell a dingbat by how much Mountain Dew they drink.
I've been telling my friends that drink it(in large quantities) that they are better off drinking coffee for their stim fix(caffeine) than that disgustingly over-sugared green goo. It's common knowledge that sugar in large quantities(and sugar is pretty much every processed food in the US) is really the reason for most First World health problems.
Sugar, in all it's forms(HFCS. et al) is the post Tobacco Tobacco...
The real question is whether the health community will be able to unseat Big Sugar from it's control over the American Diet.
However, the authors you refer to (Niven, Asimov, Bradbury) appeal mainly to a crowd of Poindexters. It's no surprise that people on a News for Nerds site would clamor for film adaptations, but please try to remember that everything isn't you, and this kind of literature scares a lot of your fellow Americans away, both because of its obtuse themes and because of the Aspie readership is associated with.
I think you're on the wrong website... How did you end up here?
The people that go to them don't expect much and hence are rarely disappointed
That about sums it up!
Nearly all of the changes proposed by the U.S. advantage corporate entities by expanding monopolies on knowledge goods, such as drug patents, and impose restrictive copyright policies worldwide. If it came into force, TPP would even allow pharmaceutical companies to sue the U.S. whenever changes to regulatory standards or judicial decisions affected their profits.
Professor Brook K. Baker of Northeastern U. School of Law [said] that the latest version of the TPP will do nothing less than lengthen, broaden, and strengthen patent monopolies on vital medications.
beginning to suspect
Beginning?!?
You have a message from the operator.