The quote is mis-attributed, and probably invented by a newspaper columnist. It is similar to the spirit of some things Tytler would say though. A quick google will get you the facts.

As long as none of them are allowed to decompose or burn, yes. =)

I used to believe too, but lately I've discovered that their review process is highly biased in favor of the product manufacturer. For example if you sell a product that is fraudulent, and have your company's employees all buy one and leave a glowing review, you'll have a solid five stars. Should anyone post a review that contains an unusual abundance of critical wording (they seem to have an algorithm for this) you will find that it's automatically rejected.

For a current example of this, have a good look at the reviews (note that most positive reviewers also reviewed with five stars all the manufacturer's other products too) for a product called neumactil, which claims to be as effecitve as an asthma inhaler. It's actually a cream with inert ingredients, propped up by a "research paper" that is essentially unscientific gibberish. Hopefully nobody will actually believe it, but since so many trust Amazon's review system implicitly, some will be bound to suffer.

Should you agree that it's not a legit product, go ahead and try to leave a critical review. Odds are good that it will be auto-rejected until you load it up with positive hyperbole.

Agreed that it's old news. I checked a few online retailers, like amazon, after reading this and primatene is selling out. Good marketing ploy at least by some clever person.

I buy non-cfc albuterol, and it's not 3x as expensive as the OTC stuff these guys are hawking. It's actually a little cheaper.

Actually salt water can provide a far better return path for rf energy than air, so depending on the frequency (I'm assuming super high) of the signal, it could be pretty good.

Not sure how I'd feel about my ugly bag of mostly water being a return path for high frequency radio though.

Not much more to be said that hasn't already been said, so thanks, and hope you find a new and satisfying path.

You'd think people ate nothing but chicken, or possibly meat, by your argument.

I'll give you a utilitarian argument that does make sense, however:

It's a well accepted fact that you can feed far more people on grain than meat. Meat is a very wasteful way to get nutrition because of all the grain that it requires, which could be used as nutrition for many more people.

Assuming the price of chicken (one of the least inefficient meats) were to go up, demand will decline, and as a consequence of simple economics, since the price increase is caused by a situation not advantageous to the producer, production of chicken would decline. Obviously at that point the supply of grain available for human consumption would increase, with lowering in price being a primary consequence of that.

So the net effect would be the complete opposite: an increase in affordable alternative nutrition for the population. And incidentally, a decrease in the costs of treating diseases introduced into the food supply may also provide a utilitarian benefit.

The fallacy in the former past is that he is equating all capitalism (economic concept) with freedom (humanist concept).

Apples / Oranges.

It's a well established characteristic of egomaniacs to appoint incompetents to follow them in order to further "magnify" their greatness by comparison.

That's what has me selling shares.

Sorta, but really, if the cyber command is using an algorithm with plenty of issues like MD5, should not worry a little?

I just want to know where I can sign up for that Australian Sex Party mentioned in TFA...

I don't even live in Australia, but I'm going if the party is still on.

State Senator. Unless you're one of the tea party secessionists you'd probably not call a state your entire country.