So in other words, you're pointing out that you could just not solve it, not come up with the optimum move each time based on expected value. Instead, you could settle for a "good enough" move and sometimes you'd get lucky. This is true.

you stated:

stochastic:
best: np-hard, not perfect, quality unknown
other: polynomial, good average

You called the first algorithm "best", acknowledging that the best (best long- term average) is NP-hard. The other can't be better than the best (by definition) , so the problem of finding the best moves remains NP-hard. Sure you could have a simpler algorithm that comes up with reasonable moves, but it'll always be beaten by the NP-hard in the long term.

this extreme nanny-state abuse

I was hoping you'd go for another paragraph and start talking about SJWs and ethics in journalism.

are mostly worried about the fact that others are making different choices from them.

I don't worry about them one bit. If they want to make those choices, I have no problem. I see them all the time, buying package after packaged of processed foods (where most GMOs end up).

Sometimes, I even help them because they can't reach the top shelves, since they're so fat they have to ride a scooter to shop for groceries. Yes, GMOs are clearly good for you, judging by the people I see who consume them almost exclusively.

but we're around 5-6 decades past where its meaningful to bring up AO anymore

Tell that to the more than 50,000 veterans who are still suffering from Agent Orange exposure.

I wonder how many of those 400,000 children who were born with birth defects after their mothers were exposed to Agent Orange are still alive? I hope there are still a few.

AO was 70 years ago

Why are all these "pro-Science" people so horrible at basic arithmetic? Agent Orange was used (and manufactured) until at least1971. Is that really "70 years ago" according to your Science?

and made under contract (as in, has fuck all to do with their regular commercial operations in the first place.)

Everything a company does is "under contract". What do you think that even means? Remember this: When the US Government wanted the nastiest, most deadly chemical possible, who did they call? Monsanto exceeded the wildest hopes for deadliness, manufacturing 20,000,000 gallons of the stuff. And do you really think that was the last deadly poison Monsanto made?

If you cannot show harm

Oh, for chrissake:

http://omicsonline.org/open-ac...

http://www.theatlantic.com/hea... (this one is notable because the author received death threats immediately after publication)

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05...

then you are in exactly the same position as anti-vaxxers.

Did I call it or what? My first post in this comments section predicted that I would be compared to anti-vaxxers. If I were to continue, I guarantee I would soon be compared to racists, Nazis and worse.

Look, I don't care if there are GMO plants. I just want it to be spelled out, right in the "nutritional data" that is already on the label, that this food is the product of a patented organism.

I find it interesting that all these "pro-Science" people are so vehemently opposed to this one bit of truthful information being given to consumers. For some reason, the believe there is a fact that consumers don't have the right to know. Further, there have been industry lawsuits attempting to stop companies who do NOT use GMOs from labeling their products as NOT containing GMOs. Go figure. I guess "Science" is fungible when it comes to people's right to know what they're eating. Since when has "Science" been in favor of people not knowing something.

Amongst the mountaineering and seafaring communities he's as often remembered as the leader who killed his team through inadequate planning, in contrast to Shackleton who brought his men back, despite a considerably more technically difficult expedition.

Why are you thinking of a human/ arachnid hybrid as having gold-coloured blood? Humans (and other vertebrates) have an oxygen-carrying compound called haemoglobin, which changes from a reddish colour when oxygenated to a bluish colour when deoxygenated. Arachnids (mites, spiders, scorpions) on the other hand use a compound called haemocyanin, which is bluish when oxygenated and colourless when deoxygenated. So a hybrid would have blood varying from a dark purple to a bluish colour depending on which side of the circulatory system you're looking at (if the hybrid has a circulatory system which we'd recognise at all.

The same company that made thalidomide also made penicillin.

Yes, and Stalin had a great sense of humor, I hear.

250 years of hastiness

That's 0.00025 Myr. A truly negligible period of time, you short-viewed non-geologist insensitive clod.

I come here for the love

Well, that was a waste of time, wasn't it. Or do you mean a special sort of love involving chains and metal probes? And lubrication - lots of lubrication carefully kept sealed in it's pots and tubes.

[Citation needed]

I'll give you a citation, but it's not going to change your mind. You've made your decision and will not budge.

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

http://www.agentorangerecord.c...

http://vietnamawbb.weebly.com/...

We're talking a minimum direct death toll of over a million to estimates that reach as high as somewhere between 3 and 4.5 million deaths. Plus, an additional 400,000 children were born with birth defects attributed directly to exposure to 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzodioxin (TCDD). "TCDD has been described as "perhaps the most toxic molecule ever synthesized by man".(Galston 1979,[13] cited in [14])"

And, "The National Toxicology Program has classified TCDD as "known to be a human carcinogen", frequently associated with soft-tissue sarcoma, non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, Hodgkin's lymphoma and chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL).[17][18]"

So, the people who concocted "the most toxic molecule ever synthesized by man" are exactly the people I want controlling the food supply. What could possibly go wrong?

Right or wrong, he's a dead man. Once the American authorities get hold of him, he's dead. whether it be by a trip down a flight of stairs, a convenient fellow-prisoner, or some other method doesn't matter ; he's going to die in custody. "Pour," in the words of Voltaire, "encourager les auteres."

Of course, if they get him without being seen to do so in public, then he may have a longer life, if less pleasant. But his head is still going to go on that metaphorical spike above the gate to the town. See above Voltaire quote again.

I think you've grasped the AC's point. (Though why s/he AC'd a perfectly reasonable comment, I don't understand.)

Just because they're using *other* pesticides (unnecessarily?) does not mean THE GMOs THEMSELVES caused any problems.

You didn't read the link. Roundup ready corn requires higher levels of pesticides.

Remember his argument was, "But after 20 years of GMO products, and absolutely no significantly measurable negative ecological/human impacts," And I gave an example of an ecological/human impact from the use of GMO products.

Opening a car door is easy enough. That way the thief can steal your CDs. Hot wiring a modern car to steal the entire automobile is quite a bit more difficult. I've opened a lot of car doors. I've never started the ignition without a key on anything newer than 1980s, when you could just pull the lock cylinder with a sufficiently strong tool, then turn the switch with a screwdriver.

The patent on the gene for "Roundup-Ready" herbicide resistance expires in a few months.

So yes, it will be an interesting time to watch what happens.

Here's what Monsanto has to say about it (from the Monsanto website page regarding the expiring patent):

In addition to the trait patent, most Roundup Ready soybeans are protected by other forms of intellectual property, such as varietal patents. These variety patents will continue to be valid after (and usually long after) the Roundup Ready trait patent expires.

http://www.monsanto.com/newsvi...

Basically, what they're saying is that the expiring patent means jack-shit. If you want to save your Roundup Ready corn seeds after the patent expires, they're still gonna take your ass to court.

What makes you think the company that created Agent Orange and dioxin is going to abide by any sort of rules? Hell, man, the government is Monsanto's lawyer.