And the fact that the article is about emotions helps you how? You said the protagonists in avatar are scientists, they aren't. The scientists are very clearly side characters. That this qualifies for their "it just needs a bit of science sprinkled in to help us grow science-interested kids" is obvious since they point it out as an example, but it still doesn't make your statement true. How about you read what you write next time?

Oh really? And there I was thinking the main character was a former marine who had absolutely no understanding of science and simply stumbled into everything. I was also under the misconception that the whole movie was resolved in an armed conflict, where scientists were hardly more than feel-good side characters that provided the necessary moral frame for the main act, which was senseless war.

Pointing out your mishap with a third account won't undo it. But don't worry, life goes on.

So what you're saying is that laws are made up by judges as they go along.

There are loads. The first that just came to mind was xkcd. Most websites of corporations do not have any kind of ads since they do not need to make money over their internet presentation, it's simply an additional service. Web shops generally do not have ads either, they only feature their own products. Then there are tons and tons of personal web sites without ads because they are low traffic and hardly cost anything per month/year. The whole ad thing only comes into play for sites that have high traffic requirements but do not have anything to sell themselves (other than space for ads). So in conclusion mostly social platforms and information providers that aren't able to sell registrations because the information they provide is too easily accessible from thousands of other sources.

If you read the article you linked to, you'd know that they didn't. People are just linking to the article explaining the honeypot, which is exactly what happens if you release an article about the experiment at the same time as the honeypot. This whole thing is utterly senseless.

Considering that even the Slashdot summaries (and many comments) refer to anonymous as a group, you can't really blame the mainstream media for doing so. I think we all have the urge to personify everything. We're not much interested in anonymous doing something. But if it's that headless dude in the suite, you know: Anonymous, it's much more interesting.

Not really. The war in Afghanistan drove large numbers of Taliban into Pakistan (they already had a presence there before). Pakistan military has been fighting them over territory for the last few years. They even signed a peace agreement that introduced sharia law in Pakistan at some point. So while the Taliban is not al Qaeda, they are not bound by Afghanistan's borders.

Do you actually own a smartphone? I doubt it very much. I have, for example, the nytimes app on my Android phone. Why? Because their mobile website is a pos. It loads slower, has a horrible layout and a cumbersome navigation. Why on earth would i want to use it? Just out of principle, because it is platform independent? Give me a break.

The term open beta has been watered down over the past couple of years. It used to mean that anybody could join as long as they can run the application. But these days it really doesn't mean anything specific anymore. In the MMORPG scene where this development has been observable, the NDA is typically lifted a few weeks before the end of the closed beta, so defining it that way would make no sense either. Then when the "open beta" stars, it can have any arbitrary restriction: Only the first x applicants, only if you have a subscription at gaming site y, only if you preorder the game, only if you bought our previous game z, etc.

here, let me give you some money so you can go buy grey color and don't have to be restricted to that black and white.

actually falsifiability as a criterion of demarcation is for people stuck in the first half of the 20th century. philosophy of science has progressed after popper, you know.

headbutts. it apparently works on ladies and gents.

there is a very simple solution to this: don't wear giant noise canceling headphones and if you already don't, adjust the volume so that you don't turn deaf from it. i have been listening to music pretty much everywhere for the better part of 5 years and i have never not heard a car or any other source of danger.