Congratulations - you just proved that the current agribusiness model is purely based on profit and zero on long-term sustainability, thereby in one shot invalidating both capitalist viewpoints (ownership results in guaranteed long-term care!) and libertarian viewpoints (by the time the agribusiness is done, polyculture is out of business and incapable of providing any sustenance).

Wish I could still use my mod points - instead I'll just post a "Well-said".

What about adoption? Children without marriage? Poly-amorous relationships? Common enough in my area that no one blinks an eye, and yet they're not in the game.

Let's face it - Tomodachi Life is the Tamagotchi of sims. Dead simple, based on really simple rules, and with little actual simulation of anything. So gay relationships - yeah, I'm not surprised they were left out.

Personally, I think the biggest mistake by Nintendo was to use Miis instead of other, customizable avatars. At that point, you're waiting to piss someone off because their preferred lifestyle is impossible in the game.

There are plenty of studies out there that show that executions cost significantly more than life imprisonments. You can get started with some studies here: http://www.amnestyusa.org/our-work/issues/death-penalty/us-death-penalty-facts/death-penalty-cost If you want to save money, lock people up in the Waldorf Astoria for life.

Yes, because making sure due process was observed, mistakes were uncovered and general asshattery by various people was minimized is just a job program. I guess we should just put you in a suit and call you Judge Dredd, right?

Here's one original study: http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2014/04/23/1306417111 There are many more out there. The consensus is that a non-trivial amount of people are wrongly sentenced to death, and an even higher proportion are wrongly convicted, but never exonerated on further review

Or asphyxiation by Nitrogen. Feed them pure Nitrogen, watch them pass and die without their body noticing the total absence of oxygen.

I'm fairly convinced that the US actually wants executions to be gruesome. Otherwise, they'd have settled on some long-known and totally harmless methods.

Actually, the reason I don't like BBT is that especially in the last few seasons, it's basically gotten mean. Penny calls the geeks losers, the geeks call Penny a loser, no one actually achieves anything, the geeky side of things is mostly there to get laughs on the basis of "look how anti-social and inept they are".

So in short, it's not really geeky anymore, the humor is basically about insulting everyone right and left, and the people are basically flat stereotypes.

Hadn't thought about that - good to know.

When I read a page, I can actually see multiple words in a sentence, context from the line(s) above, and generally can access a context of about 10-15 words at a time. While speed reading (as in, actual speed reading a page), you read by going down the center of the page, which preserves a good chunk of the context, and assumes that missing a few words here and there is only going to minorly impair your understanding of the text.

This, on the other hand, provides a minor speed-up at the cost of context, the ability to back-track and no ability to skip words that don't help much with understanding like various particles or flowery prose.

Yep, this approach is idiotic.

Correction: people get shot in China when their fraud embarrasses the government.

What's with the hard-on that some right-wingers have for autocratic governments? Wait - don't answer that. It'll be depressing.

Good. Step 2: how are legal repercussions determined? Compare and contrast your inalienable rights with those of blacks pre 1970.

Please explain how those rights are enforced without resorting to laws, a court system, or other people part of the power structure.

Have fun.

That was certainly an eloquent and convincing argument. Not to mention, a great display of your grasp of the English language.

Fun fact: your right to life is inviolate only for as long as everyone around you agrees to it. Fun fact #2: no one specified anything about what life.

In other words: your right to life is a privilege granted to you by everyone around you, and can be revoked by a single person in your environment. Feel free to explain how that differs from a privilege.

Because a lot of Slashdotters are libertarians who only have the most cursory understanding of social philosophy, the Constitution, what lead to it, who created it and why, and are about as sensible as the Communists of the last century.

Rights exist because a majority of the power structure in a society agree that they do. Where that agreement comes from is rather irrelevant - church, open fora, private discussions, backroom deals between cigar-chomping fat cats, a sentimental upwelling; it all works the same way: at some point, enough people agree that some rights are useful or fit into the current moral philosophy, and decide to enforce them.

That's why equal rights for gays are being accepted now, that's why Freedom of Speech is central to how the US operates politically, and why gun rights in the US are sacrosanct.

Babbling on about natural rights is as useful about babbling on about what Nature "wants".

Feel free to demonstrate how the theories and models do not match reality, and provide a better theory and model. In the meantime, your opinion is worth squat.