If they had been declared legal persons, you know someone would've tried to marry one.

Too late.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

If they are not legal persons, that makes them illegal persons. Right?

If they outlaw chimps, then only outlaws will have chimps.

The chimps need to band together and register as a corporation!

I think it's already been done.

http://www.trump.com/

Labelling them is arguably a "warning".

And arguably, it's truth in advertising.

There are labels of all sorts on food. There's a little "K" in a circle that means kosher and there's a symbol for Halal and there's labels that say "Grown in California" and "fresh" and "delicious". Those are not warnings.

There is nutritional information, there's a list of ingredients. If consumers want it, why not a simple little symbol that shows the food was grown from GM organisms?

Remember, it's the consumers that are paying for all the GMO research, for all the products, for all the salaries of all the scientists, for all the marketing and for the lobbyists trying to get the federal government to pass industry-friendly laws.

When an industry tries to get laws passed which are meant to make sure customers DON'T get what they want, it raises red flags.

I was diagnosed as a Type 1 in 1997. Back then, a 10ml vial (U-100) of Eli Lilly's Humulin R or NPH costs--I'm not making this up-- $17.00. Today, without insurance, the same vial goes for $99. And this is for insulin made from recombinant DNA tech that has been around since the '70's like the article mentions.

The wonders of modern science. Pharmaceutical companies use recombinant DNA tech to make a drug cheaper to make but more expensive for sick people to buy.

Ain't it grand?

The food religion says GMO is bad until one of them happens to need insulin and also happens to be allergic to "natural" cow insulin, then GMO produced humulin (secreted by a genetically modified e. coli bacterium to be chemically similar to human insulin) is a miracle.

And because tomatoes are delicious, we should all go eat a whole bunch of Atropa belladonna.

The GMO religion believes that every GMO is a good GMO. That no genetically modified organism can ever possibly hurt you, so you must not be allowed to know which foods are from GMOs. They've never heard about NewLeaf Potatoes or LibertyLink Rice.

You know the difference between GMO produced humulin and GMO produced food? GMO produced medicines are labeled. You know what else is different about them? The drug manufacturers who use GMOs have done a good job of marketing their products and the makers of Agent Orange have done a lousy job of marketing their products. Maybe if they used some of the money they spend lobbying congress to pass industry-friendly laws to market GMO foods to consumers, they might be able to sell people that genetically modified foods have worthwhile benefits.

Consumers don't care if their bread is made from Calingiri or Ytipi.

But consumers DO care if their food is made from GMOs, so just put a label on it.

Outside of GMOs, what do you normally think of companies that make decisions for consumers? Maybe Samsung doesn't think you need to know what kind of processor is in your cell phone, because well, it's pretty much the same, and you probably won't notice the difference. How about if a company that sells socks doesn't think you need to know if the socks you buy are really 100% cotton or a 60-40 blend of cotton and polyester? What if the company doesn't think you need to know if the socks in the package or green or brown?

Remember, it's consumers who are paying the bills. They're the ones paying for the GMOs, and for all the research and for the marketing and press releases like the one in the article and for the high-paid lobbyists that are working to thwart their preferences. In most things, the person who's paying the bills gets to decide. The fact that you don't think consumers need to know something doesn't mean you get to decide whether they get to know something.

Just because you want to know something that is not worth including on a label doesn't mean they are hiding anything.

No, the "hiding" part comes when you lobby congress to make sure no state can pass a labeling law.

Does it make anyone else uncomfortable that this story about industrial networks being vulnerable to cyberattacks follows immediately after a story about robotic surgeons?

How will we know the robotic surgeons have installed the most recent security updates? Will they be WiFi enabled so the teenager sitting in the hospital cafeteria can use them to play Operation and try to light up my nose while trying to take out my funny bone?

That's cute. You think that actual benefits of GMOs mean anything to the people listening to all the FUD that gets spread about them.

And you think that hiding the foods' provenance is the way to make people stop believing the FUD? That's very interesting.

Because when someone tells me I'm not allowed to know something about a product I'm buying, it immediately endears me to the company hiding the information.

... what's it taste like?

With all these miraculous properties, you'd think companies would want to let people know that their food is GMO. You know, like on the label.

I was thinking more along the lines of sending up an anti-drone drone to grab it and drag it back down.

Sounds good, but only if I can make a drone that looks like Snoopy on top of a flying dog house.

So, it's a remote exploit in that you can do it if you're within Wi-Fi range (and the gun has it's Wi-Fi turned on)

"Hello, Mr Zimmerman, I'm Brad from XYZ Firearms Corp and I'd like to walk you through a software update for your Smart SniperTM Rifle today that will make it much safer to use as well as 75% more accurate in hitting targets with black skin. There will be no charge for this update, but I'll need you to temporarily enable WiFi during this procedure."

I bet you'd get very high levels of compliance from owners of "Smart SniperTM Rifles" in many areas of the US.

There has to be a better way to take down drones. Firing a shotgun in your backyard into the air is going to be some kind of misdemeanor, even in Kentucky. Something like "discharge of a firearm inside city limits" or something.

Can someone please start 3D-printing some silent drone-killing weapons? It would be so much more satisfying than clay pigeons and my neighbors cats. (Note to neighbor: I'm kidding. That wasn't me.)