Because "people being chauffeured around" represent such a small proportion of rush-hour traffic that basing a decision around this particular concern would be far more emotional than pragmatic.

"Aspartame has been found to be safe for human consumption by more than ninety countries worldwide, with FDA officials describing aspartame as "one of the most thoroughly tested and studied food additives the agency has ever approved" and its safety as "clear cut""

So.... no. Probably not. But judging by the comments on here, you're not alone.

Have sugar. If you don't want sugar, but you want your drink to taste sweet, you can have natural sugars. Otherwise, you're fucked and eating synthetic stuff no matter what?

Almost all of those substances - in moderation - are food-safe and no more dangerous than eating sugar, or any other natural food. Some people might collapse and die from a single exposure, others it will make ill, others it will upset them a bit, but the vast majority will just eat it and get on with life.

If it worries you, go back to eating sugar.

Connectivity is huge, but it's only one of the ingredients in making this decision.

If you want the app to work for them outside of the corporate WiFi, you have to host it on the public internet, where all attackers are equally welcome without regard to skillz or skripts. Are you sure that server is secure? What about tomorrow? Are you patching it? Are your users securing their devices properly? Uh oh, it's the new version of Heartbleed, go back three spaces.

You also have to consider performance. Is this something that your users will use constantly for their jobs, or occasionally for some rare piece of info? If it's going to add one second to every screen, and you're asking people to tap their way through 600 screens a day, the inefficiency is going to cost you 10 minutes worth of payroll per user per day. Maybe you make that up in hardware costs if you force your users to bring their own smartphone to work. Maybe the sluggishness just makes your users miserable throughout the day. Or maybe it simply costs you a lot of money.

On the other side, if it's used perhaps once or twice a day by 2000 people, poor performance and connectivity issues won't be nearly as important as savings on developer costs and time to market, Or if you have only a half dozen heavy users, perhaps you're willing to eat the payroll cost of an hour per day instead of spending them on development.

It's a question best answered by the money.

Manning would almost certainly have been caught regardless. All those State Department cables could only have come from someone with access to the entire database. That's a reasonably short list of people, and everyone on it would have been grilled and inspected from head to toe.

His (her) talking about it just made the inevitable happen faster.

I'm much more cynical, and I don't think Pepsi is giving in to anyone. I think they're trying to exploit people's fears that "OMG chemicals bad". It's more like they're advertising "We're the only brand that dares to print arsenic-free on our products."

I think the real problem with Diet Pepsi and Pepsi Max is that they taste more or less like regular Pepsi. Their advertising slogan may as well be "Pepsi - for when you can't afford actual Coca-Cola."

Neither Manning nor Snowden remained anonymous. At some point the leak is so big that anonymity is not possible, and someone will pay the price for the leak.

Let's be honest, even if I had a recording of a meeting between ISPs, government and the music industry all agreeing to it and admitting it you would still write it off as a fake, or "leftist propaganda" or a "liberal conspiracy".

When someone like you blasts off a reply about left, or right, or insert whatever inherent hate target you have here it says one thing, it says that that persons views cannot be fluid, it says their views are crystalised. Your outrage, your bile spewing to your chosen hate target occurs because you cannot cope with the idea that the world does not bend to your whims, you detest the idea that someone might think differently to you, you want everything to be as you want it. In short, you have the mind of a dictator, albeit thankfully without any of the power, so you're left spewing bile.

But I'll leave you with this, this isn't a scientific publication, I don't profess that everything I say is guaranteed to be 100% correct, I don't post with a warranty on the validity of it, I post ideas based on what we do know about the world. So yes, it's possible that I'm way off the mark, it's possible that I'm completely wrong, but here's the thing. It's also entirely possible that you're completely wrong too- the difference is I'm open to other views and that's how I get to avoid being a flagrant wing nut, you however, are not, and that's why you are a flagrant bile spewing wingnut with nothing useful to say.

If you would like to know why I've put forward the possibility that ISPs, government and the music industry might well have gotten a little too cosy, then I'd gladly give you some links. But frankly, for that to be even worth my time you'd have to display some semblance of rationality, and get past your wingnut bile spewing. Given your post history I'm not convinced you can do that, you appear too mentally immature to engage in rational debate.

http://www.nybooks.com/article...
The Myth of Charter Schools
Diane Ravitch
November 11, 2010

Some fact-checking is in order, and the place to start is with the film’s quiet acknowledgment that only one in five charter schools is able to get the “amazing results” that it celebrates. Nothing more is said about this astonishing statistic. It is drawn from a national study of charter schools by Stanford economist Margaret Raymond (the wife of Hanushek). Known as the CREDO study, it evaluated student progress on math tests in half the nation’s five thousand charter schools and concluded that 17 percent were superior to a matched traditional public school; 37 percent were worse than the public school; and the remaining 46 percent had academic gains no different from that of a similar public school. The proportion of charters that get amazing results is far smaller than 17 percent.

Yeah tell me about it, as I say I was struggling at first and figured maybe it was a snobbish reference to the use of artifact rather than the British English but basically never used artefact.

It wasn't until I literally parsed it word by word taking a pause in between that I caught it. It's a rather fantastic example of inbuilt human brain automatic error detection and correction though :) Judging by the replies it caught quite a few people - I think there's a psychological study in there somewhere!

Also, yes, we do buy more than we used to buy. That is called keeping the economy running, and if we weren't buying all those gadgets and trinkets and things *you* don't think are necessary our economy would be in even worse shape. As for the credit card debt, if wages were at least keeping even with what they have historically been people wouldn't have to fall back on so much credit debt now would they.

So what happens when credit cards are all maxed out and people have to lower their spending? Why companies will have to lay off people, leading to even less demand, leading to more layouts, and so forth until the economic tailspin turns into an outright economic and social collapse. Yet no company can unilaterally rise wages to ward off this disaster, because even if it made them more competitive due to a workforce that wouldn't hate them quite so much, the shareholders would complain, since the money could be going to them instead.

If only there were a party who could simply order everyone to rise wages, like it or not, to meet some kind of minimum standard high enough to keep the market working. Or, even better, simply pay a minimal income unconditionally to everyone.

Hawking, who appeared via hologram,

Wait, what?

Here is what they said, followed by what you just said they said.

they a found trove of strange artifacts
they found a trove of strange artifacts

Hopefully side by side you can more easily spot the blatant illiteracy :)

Have you ever stopped to read one of your own posts? It's just you like to cry that everyone else is crying, which means that you're basically always crying that the world apparently doesn't adhere to your Daily Mail led world view after all.

I know it must suck being lied to all your life, to find out that you've in fact been consistently fed a crock of shit when reality comes shining through, but I'm afraid that's something you'll have to get used to.

Don't worry, you can go and vote Farage soon, and when your ilk get a mere 15% at most you can pretend that you're somehow in a majority and we should do everything you say, even though the reality is you're still a pointless little squeak in the corner that no one gives the slightest shit about.