Comment Of course (Score 3, Insightful) 44
I want both Google and Microsoft to know every aspect of my life.
I want both Google and Microsoft to know every aspect of my life.
This might ignite a firestorm among ICE car vendors.
Now if only we had a car analogy.
"I asked my legal expert for advice, but I didn't like it. Hey, you folks on the internet got any better opinions?"
Does your "oh wait" mean waiting several years until the patents expire, so that competitors can make it too?
Ex Machina isn't about AI, it is about mangina and gynocentrism. It show how men are so fucking stupid they will sacrifice themselves over the mere image of a female. Fuck this world.
Helen of Troy
Funny how they don't claim the US military faked a bunch of wars too seeing as how NASA's funding is around 40 times less.
Really, cause I heard quite a few people complaining about fake weapons of mass destruction..
We have jurisdiction over any country that threatens our profits. If you think otherwise, feel free to point out any country that does not respect our patents and copyrights.
You're seriously arguing that using more of several different herbicides because you had to be careful not to poison your crop is better than using less herbicides?
If you are OK with people having to leave their community in order to express their views, don't come crying to me if someday you too have to leave your community in order to express your views.
Yet, glyphosate reduced amount of herbicide used.
I'm usually not a grammar nazi, but holy fuck that made my eye start to twitch.
That's grammar Nazi; you capitalize proper nouns.
That is one of those horror stories anti-GMO activists love to propagate, but the fact is that nobody ever saw a fish-tomato on the market.
Why would that be a horror story? I wouldn't mind more Omega-3 in my tomatoes, bonus if it reduces my mercury-laced fish consumption.
Now who the hell considers themselves an opponent of labeling GMO foods unless they have a financial stake in it? Is there anyone walking down the street who has nothing to do with the food industry and considers themselves an opponent of labeling GMO foods?
Yes, I'm an opponent of meaningless and probably misleading labels. GMO foods could be safer, or more dangerous, than self-engineered foods. They might also be more, or less nutritious, and contain more, or less antioxidants. They might be better, or worse for the environment. The fact that it was purposely designed means very little compared to what it was purposely designed to do.
But all your average consumer will see is that, "this must be dangerous because why else would it be labeled?" (In the not-too-distant future, non-GMO will require warning labels because they will be more dangerous.)
Or was that so that smaller amounts of safer varieties of pesticide/herbicide can be used?
Hybrids have a multi-thousand year safety track record, I think we can call the long term data in on that issue. GMOs do not.
A lot of natural foods contain toxins, allergens, carcinogens -- in small quantities, sure, but we can use genetic engineering to reduce that without losing the flavors, nutrients, and antioxidants. With selective breeding, who knows what you'll get. Using genetic engineering can also reduce the amount or nastiness of pesticides used.
If a thing's worth doing, it is worth doing badly. -- G.K. Chesterton
