You are referring to the rootkit fiasco? Or something else?

Friendships.

I'm not sure that counts as deceptive. Dangerous sure. There have been a few times where, if I would have needed to swerve to avoid something, I would not have known to not swerve left. But deceptive?

I don't follow. How does adding "the hell" imply aggressiveness?

Except they haven't yet been proved wrong. Yes, the things they bring up have already been proved wrong time and time again, but they personally were not aware of it.

I forget the exact details, but during the 2008 presidential election, I responded to a thread that I think was about Barack Obama's birth certificate being no business of ours, saying that if the constitution requires the president be a naturally born citizen, then for any presidential candidate, their birth certificate is our business. And the replies I got figuratively bit my head off. I did not know why my post elicited such anger, because at the time I did not know about the large group of people trying to get Obama disqualified on the grounds of his not being a naturally born citizen, and of their dismissal of his birth certificate, or whatever.

Like I said, I don't remember the exact details. But the point is, if I was a different person, then instead of trying to figure out why this hatred got directed towards me, I might've immediately sided with the "birthers" and ignored any future attempts at "proving" me wrong.

It may get annoying debunking the same myths again and again, but please remember that for the person bringing the myth to your attention, they may have just heard about it and are legitimately curious about why this thing they just heard about does not debunk AGW.

What about converts to a religion? If someone were to convert to Pastafarianism, does that mean we can continue to forbid them from wearing their colander, just because they were not raised as a Pastafarian?

Correct. And it is not my responsibility to teach the police the made-up language I used when writing on that paper.

Not saying it's right, but prosecuting a UK citizen for what they said on Twitter is not saying that Twitter is within UK jurisdiction, it is saying that regardless of where a UK citizen is, the UK citizen is within UK jurisdiction.

Now, when the UK government demands that Twitter do something about the offending post, that is them claiming that Twitter is within UK jurisdiction.

.....WHY??? Sure, it might be unnecessary if no one is sitting there, but what possible benefit is conferred by disabling an airbag?

Since TFS is about Amazon, one would expect that the unnamed company you are referring to there would be Amazon. But since Amazon Prime is $99, I have to ask, what other company are you talking about?

Um, killing innocent people is worse than imprisoning innocent people. Don't get me wrong, imprisoning innocent people is wrong, and I support the idea that it is better for 1000 guilty men to go free than it is to imprison a single innocent. But to say that the killing of innocents is equally as bad as the imprisoning of innocents implies that, if someone were to ask you to choose either life in prison or execution for yourself, you would respond with something like "I don't care, flip a coin, they're both equally undesirable".

The only thing that sign will do is make burglars nostalgic for The Far Side.