No, it doesn't fire white flags from the cannons or fireworks from the missile tubes - because it doesn't have missile tubes, and the sails double as white flags.

So we just keep going back and forth, as one party screws everything up, they lose, then the other has a turn at screwing everything up, until they lose control. Great system there, with two similar parties that refuse to ever make useful compromises, and with no alternative or coalitions to bring sanity to Washington. Makes me wonder... not which side is right, but how they have together gained such a strangle hold on American politics without ever accomplishing much (or not much anymore, anyway). Good job Americans, now you've given your two measly parties so much power that they're less likely than ever to listen to reason or allow anyone not aligned with one of them to do anything.

Uh, the "most common" (biggest market share, by a lot) would be K-Y. Nice try.

Does the requirement to compost extend to marijuana? If you throw your stems out with your trash (as well as all the leaves and crap that are byproducts of growing your own), will you be subject to fines?

Hey, this is actually a concern there.

Correction, MAD has prevented WWIII, so far. Maybe the period between WWII and what will develop into something known later as WWIII is much longer than expected. What if Hitler's mayhem were eclipsed? Is there a country with sizable military might (including tactical nukes) that is willing to use every tool in the shed? The Soviet Union was not that adversary, thankfully. No, not North Korea. Could China be taken by storm by a new charismatic national and cultural leader, who takes a more aggressive stance? Maybe Putin suddenly loses his mind or a successor becomes desperate or calls our perceived bluff.

I can't see either terrorists or nations without a country gaining enough leverage to start a global war before cooler heads can prevail, but who is to say that now-secure and predictable weapons will never fall into the hands of corrupt factions of a legitimate government, or that an unexpected military coup could never be successful anywhere? I hope you turn out to be right that MAD prevented WWIII (for good), but the future is long, and is really just history that hasn't happened yet. The best we can do to protect ourselves is to eliminate as many threats as possible, by whatever appropriate means, and to nullify most of the rest with the ability to destroy an entire country and devastate whole regions if we are tested.

If you acknowledge that there will always be a top dog and a struggle to be number one, do you want to take any chance of losing alpha status? The nuclear genie is out of the lamp, so as much as I hate to say this, we have to maintain our military superiority, and that means keeping our nuclear arsenal ready and usable, able to target nearly any point on earth at a moment's notice, and enough to obliterate any attacker. Maybe I sound like the computer from War Games (maybe I amthe computer from War Games), but having the nukes to dissuade any attacker seems like a good idea to me. Nukes aren't going away, sadly, so you're either dominant or your security is at risk.

Yes, you're right - submarine armaments are indeed being renewed now, which is what this discussion is about. And are you wishing for better reading comprehension or are you just being a turd?

SSRIs are well known to cause sexual dysfunction in males (some SSRIs and some males more than others), but this is the first I've heard about escitalopram increasing sexual stamina. As such, I wouldn't rule out a placebo effect, especially since so many factors can affect libido.

Because our understanding of how SSRIs operate on the most basic level is still very poor, and the research in question has found some clues about how to proceed. It makes sense to eliminate the variable of serious mood disorders, since the mechanisms behind them are poorly understand and differential diagnoses are a huge problem. Before fixing your car that runs rough you have to have some idea of how it works and what your tools do, and that's what this study was about. Hopefully some day soon we'll have a more thorough understanding of depression and similar ailments, as well as why some drugs help some people, but we are a long way off.

Some possible explanations that are better than "SSRIs make people go on shooting rampages":

They were misdiagnosed, and mistreated.
They were depressed (duh) and became more depressed when the SSRI did nothing to help. (Suicidal ideation is a major reason for starting SSRI treatment in the first place.)
Some people do that for inexplicable reasons, whether on SSRIs, withdrawing from SSRIs, or having never taken SSRIs.
Not that many people on SSRIs do anything violent and your perception is based on misunderstanding and poor media reporting that you have no real statistical basis for.

Clearly more research needs to be done, but to me this sort of anti-SSRI argument seems like the anti-seat belt arguments you used to hear. In a few very, very rare cases people may have been injured, and even killed, by seat belts crushing internal organs, causing strangulation, prohibiting exit from burning vehicles, and what have you. People who cite cases like this are willfully oblivious to the fact that seat belts are much, much, MUCH more likely to prevent serious injury or death than they are to cause injury. Given that so many people take SSRIs and do not become murderers, and so many of them credit SSRIs with keeping them alive or improving their lives, my estimation is that they offer a huge net benefit.

That's why a huge proportion of iphones I see have cracked screens - no one has figured out a cheap way to make really tough, thin glass with a high tensile strength. The weak corners and edges on iphones and the careless owners don't help. I wonder if we'll ever see a polymer-based material that has good enough scratch resistance and optical properties to be used for phone/tablet screens. That would be killer, though I'll take Gorilla Glass over portland cement for a screen any day.

They will be connected to the grid anyway, since they will (at least initially) probably be generating a surplus of electricity. So it is more efficient to sell the excess to a utility company than to store it in batteries produced with current or near-term technology. This is not a case of Tesla trying to dupe anyone, as the net effect is highly desirable.

"If Tesla Can Run Its Gigafactory On 100% Renewables, Why Can't Others?"

Because others don't charge $100,000 a pop for their products!

If YOU BUY crappy software that is further crippled by useless bloatware, that is on you. You don't have to buy crap. There are better alternatives.

No, Apple products just suck so equally for everyone that people get locked into the brand and don't know or care about the alternatives available to them. iPhone sucks for you? Deal with it until you can buy the new one. iPhone breaks? Get a new one, or keep using it with a shattered screen, like everyone else seems to do. iPod dies a young death? Buy a new one.

Apple makes decent stuff that looks nice in the same way a Honda Accord looks nice - it isn't offensive, or special in any way. But if you care to do a little research you can do much better in most cases and get more for your money. I'm quite satisfied with my LG phone (no need for an ipod), ASUS tablet, and Toshiba laptop - they all do everything a competing Apple product can do, they all do things MY way, they are durable, and I saved enough cash to take a vacation.

At least with Android phones you have a chance of getting something you'll like and will suite you, even if you don't do any research before buying. With Apple, everyone is in the same boat with the same crappy handsets that are locked-down the same way and crack equally easily, which comparison shopping can not fix. A cracked iphone screen seems to be the norm rather than the exception, as does complaining constantly about how bad your battery sucks, how small the screen, how bulky your Otter Box is, is or how poorly the latest OS upgrade works.