Do you know what a chemical is. Without chemicals you'd be dead. Your misuse of the word is blaring example that you have no clue what you're talking about.

The problem is that people don't understand what that term means. It sounds like it means it probably gives people cancer. What it does not mean it that it causes cancer in normal use. For example, nitrates are on that same list. This includes sodium nitrate, which is in all cured meats (bacon, ham, lunchmeat, sausage) - even Organic & natural ones (check ingredients for "celery powder" or "beet powder"). So, under normal rates of consumption, a human isn't going to get nearly enough to be carcinogenic. But if you give massive quantities to rats, it is.

So with glyphosate, what is it? Is it just carcinogenic if you give massive amounts to rats? Is it carcinogenic if you inhale it but not consume it? Is it only carcinogenic in liquid form but not after it dries? Do people get enough of it in their diet to be carcinogenic? How 'bout if you live next to a farm that uses it? What about farm workers? The classification of "probably carcinogenic" is essentially meaningless without proper context.

Canadians get to choose? Here is Soviet USA, ISPs choose YOU!

Apple essentially invented a new market, just like Starbucks did. Were MP3 players (and expensive espresso drinks) available before that? Yes. Could you download music before that? Yes. What Apple did that wasn't so readily available before was made a device that could hold tons of music and had the market power to negotiate contracts to make music available for purchase on iTunes. Apple (and Starbucks) made their market readily available to the masses - whether it being available to the masses is a matter of perception or of a superior, easier to use product is irrelevant, what matters to the market is whether or not people are actually buying it.

The streaming video market is already pretty big and available to the masses through Netflix and Hulu. What's not so available to the masses is being able to stream the major networks in "real time" (which really means not having to wait a day to watch a new episode on Hulu). Sure, there are options, but those options are not so readily available to the masses - again, whether it's perception or a difficulty of use for non-geeks is irrelevant, what matters to the market is whether people are actually doing it. People hang on to cable either because (1)Hulu/Nextflix doesn't offer them what they want, or because (2) they're afraid of change. For group #1, offer them what they want and make it easy to obtain (and cheaper than cable) and people will go for it.

And people don't want to spend hours and hours figuring out new shit (or driving more than 3 blocks to a coffee shop), which is part of making things available to the masses.

Sheesh, it's just semantics. Definitions are for communication, if they call them brown dwarfs then you know what they're talking about. The IAU's considered an object with a mass capable of fusing deuterium a brown dwarf, which is 13 Jupiter masses. Don't like it? Too bad, as long as it's qualified with "brown dwarf" then you know what they're referring to. So, the term "closest start to Earth" is another issue of semantics. In the context of this article, it means, "closest object outside of our own solar system with a mass over 13 Jupiters." Now, if they start handing out medals and big prize money to stars for being the closest to Earth, then go ahead and debate it, otherwise who cares?

More like a look-alike. I'm not trying to play semantics here, but the term knock-off implies that either it's pretending to be the same thing. These watches are made to look like the Apple watch (whose pics have been available for a long time) but they don't carry the same name (Ai-watch, D-watch) and there is no indication at all about functionality. It's like the difference between a knock-off Rolex that actually says Rolex on it and a cheap watch from Wal-Mart that is made to look like a Rolex.

If this becomes more widely used, either way, this would probably not be something that would be done in lieu of a biopsy. If a doctor had reason to suspect cancer, they'd likely still do a biopsy. This could be done in addition to the biopsy as an additional datapoint, but mostly this could be done as part of a routine screening. You're not going to get a thyroid biopsy as part of a routine physical, but a K9 scent screening could be added to a standard urinalysis.

I know you're trying to reference newspeak, but OMG to think that language will be abbreviated in such a way is totes cray, lol.

So, where does it say anything about criminal charges, or even expulsion? The are closing down the frat chapter. Beyond just being racist, this is probably what did them in the most, FTA:

First off, it is illegal (though not criminally) to deny somebody admission to anything based on race. Secondly, they don't have to commit a crime to be banned, in general universities have policies and codes of conduct, and if you violate those you can be expelled. In this case it appears the frat is being closed down because they violated university policies, not because they committed crimes.

Look, I know you're a troll, but I'm going to feed you anyway. While most Christian neocons have learned to shut their mouth in public when it comes to racism, check out any conservative blog or Facebook page and you'll see it riddled with hateful anti-Muslim comments, along the lines of saying we should kill them all, or blow them all up, or round them all up and lock them away (ahem, concentration camps).

Whoever creates and markets the machine that does this gets all the money.

Yeah, so they've done well with the washing part, and the drying part. Most people don't mind moving laundry over from one machine to the one next to it - takes a little time if you have to pull out the things that don't get machine dried, but really not too time consuming. The next most time consuming part is folding...so if there were a folding machine/bot, that would be a massive step forward, especially if it sorted too. People would pay good money for a folding machine.

Why do you think that? I'm pretty sure it's still computer intrusion even if they don't know how to do anything security related. Here's a brick and mortar analogy: If somebody's front door doesn't have a lock, it's still illegal to walk in. And anyway, even if you're right, then having a password, even if it's a default password that hasn't been changed, is *some* security. Intent matters. A lot. Are you accessing their system because you're trying to do something nefarious, or because you accidentally thought it was the free WiFi from the coffee shop next door and you're just trying to check your email?

What do you mean? The government is monitoring them very carefully, since they're the ones paying for the chemicals and loading them in the airplanes. Especially after the travesty of 9/11, where they forgot to take into account the altered burning temperature that results when the chemicals mix with jet fuel when they were doing the calculations for their inside job. But since then, they are saving money by having Monsanto put the chemicals in GMOs. OMG TOXINS!

My county (Maui) is looking at banning polystyrene food containers. We banned plastic shopping bags a few years ago and it's made a huge difference, I used to see plastic bags blowing around, caught in bushes by the side of the road, and in the ocean all the time, but no more.

The thing with the food containers is...most of them will be replaced with PLA. PLA is compostable, where it's in a commercial compost pile over X degrees and with other conditions that help break it down. But what about floating around in the ocean? Obviously it's going to take longer than paper to break down, but has anyone shown how long (or if) it takes to break down in the ocean? A simple google search doesn't reveal anything useful...