Steve Jobs died because he delayed treatment for his cancer while he tried an alternative therapy with no backing by research.

You're invoking magic in the form of clairvoyance here, and as a result, you are no better than the homeopaths. The problem is the word "because". You don't know whether he would have lived.
Of course, choosing homeopathic "cures", if he did that, was extraordinarily stupid, but claiming to know what would have happened is even more stupid.

Not to forget languages like Swedish, where à is a letter in its own right, and neither an umlaut nor a dieresis.
That means that technically, when written in a language that uses diereses, the dots can be stacked. A Swedish word like "nÃÃ" (nah-ah) rendered in a language with diereses would be written with two extra dots on the second letter to show that the second à should also be pronounced.
That's where Unicode fails - instead of having the diereses as a separate marker only, it has allowed for characters like "a with diereses", but not for varieties of letters that look like they already have them. What letters look like should not be any concern of Unicode. An à with both umlaut and dieresis added should be perfectly acceptable to Unicode, and how the presenter wants to present it none of Unicode's concern. Whether it shows up with two, four or six dots above it, or a colon before it, or any other visual representation.

That depends on the font. Not on Unicode.
You can have fonts where a Greek capital alpha looks very different from a Latin capital A, but that doesn't mean anything. There are fonts where zero and capital O look identical too, but that doesn't mean they are the same character, just because they appear identical looking in one particular font.

Without any link to in-depth stories or sources, it is not going to be used by those who want more information than what amounts to a tweet.
This is for Generation ADHD.

I'm just surprised they won't drop the text altogether and use a 5 second video snippet.

I'm not sure it has anything to do with the elections, but it sure has a putrid smell of wanting to justify condemning Snowden as a traitor, pointing to "evidence" that he did harm.
Which, coming from organizations that have been proven to lie to us by the same Snowden doesn't seem all that credible without anything to back it up except their word. I know just how much value I put on their word.

It's also rather unclear how they can say that the intel came from Snowden, and not, say, someone hacking into a system, or a real mole turning info over. How could they possibly know the source, given that the intel likely is duplicated in hundreds of places?

Yeah, those damn engineers screwing people over...

I don't blame people for their parents being rich. I do blame parents who send their kids to expensive schools.

If the overall level of engineering education rises as a result of this gift, great!
We don't get to decide what others donate to. Bitch too much about their giving, and they'll just stop giving, and that's not an improvement.
Have you willingly donated to a poorer engineering school lately?

This might be news to you, but to most of the world, US democrats are republicans. They may not be Republicans with a capital R, but they certainly are republicans, and far to the right of what's considered the center in most countries.

There are only two double-blind studies with results in that list, and one of them only had 9 participants, leaving only one result:
https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2...

It's not large scale, though - 331 participants.

And that one is for treating a problem that exists in the brain, not the body. And worse, it has no fewer than 35(!) secondary outcome measures. This is p-hunting at its worst. With that many outcomes, there's a statistical near-certainty that there will be one or more "significant" findings. You could test people for drinking 35 different sodas and find a statistical significant result for one of them versus a disease.

Color me not convinced. This smells of snake oil and bad science. That there are that many studies, most of them for ailments that are especially prone to natural variations, and yet not a single focused one that show positive results says all you need to know.
This is zone therapy and chiropracty for the new millennium.

I should have said that the mass of an attracted object is irrelevant if the attractor is stationary. Like, one presumes, said McD station was thought to be.

When the relative difference in mass between two objects go towards infinity, the amount of influence the mass of the lighter object has goes towards zero. The pull a car has on earth, an astronaut on the moon, or a star on a galactic center black hole is so small that for all purposes they can be disregarded, and the greater objects be considered stationary.

Jokes aside, you're perpetuating a false belief.
It should be well known by now that gravity does not accelerate heavier objects any faster than lighter objects. The mass of the bodies is irrelevant if non-zero.
Ref Gallileo's alleged demonstration at the tower of Pisa.

So what you're saying is that those who designed the SR-71 were mediocre and those who sponsored it were a mix of geniuses, idiots and anything in-between?

If you're on the top end of a bell curve, your possible deviation is as low as it can be. You are mediocre, belonging to the largest segment of the population.

If you're at the bottom end of a bell curve, your possible deviation is as high as it can be. There's no telling. You may be a genius or you might be an idiot.

Anyhow, what's pretty clear is that most of those who designed and sponsored the SR-71 are dead.

Security isn't a measurable commodity, It's a philosophy.

I'm good with that. I don't want have to build an opaque dome over my property to keep privacy. And I don't want to become collateral damage of a drone strike either.