Well, you should be modded down as flamebait, but that doesn't seem to have happened. I don't notice anything useful in your comment.

Of course, you may be a troll, in which case shame on me for responding. But I wasn't even nearly the first, so I don't feel too bad.

More than just that. One of the causes of aging appears to be "tired mitochondria". So you need to make sure that the mitochondira of the cell line is in good shape. Difficult, as (AFAIK) we don't know how to tell when mitochondria aren't acting efficiently in a single cell, only in an organ. And mitochondria are subject to a high rate of mutation, so if you grow a clone*, you want to ensure that all cells in that clone have efficient mitochondria.

*A clone is a cluster of cells grown from a single cell. This would cover an organ as well as an organism. Say, e.g., a new liver or kidney.

OK. Sorry. Make that "canonically isomorphic".

That may be Wikipedia, but it doesn't match standard usage. In neither Norway nor Sweden are the means of production owned by the state...except for some of them, and that's true in the US, too. (E.g., the state owns the Hoover Dam, which is definitely a "means of production".)

And in almost EVERY nation "some sectors of an economy " are "run in a socialist manner, while others" are "run in a capitalist way". Including the US, Britain, France, Germany, China, Russia, etc.

Yes, I am claiming that in every state to the extent that social services are supplied by the state, that state is socialist. And it is not one dimensional. Some states cover some areas, other states cover other areas. A few just leave you to die if you can't make it on your own.

Sample areas of coverage:
1) unemployment coverage.
2) minimal housing
3) minimal heat supply
4) minimal food supply
5) clean air
6) clean water
etc. I notice that I left out health care, but it's just one of many areas I left out. I also, e.g., left out public defenders, police protection, emergency rescue, and many others. Note that every one I've explicitly mentioned is provided, at least to an extent, by the US govt. (sometimes indirectly).

I would also disagree with your definiton of capitalism, though that's certainly a lot closer to being accurate. I think Adam Smith might agree with your definition, but to me the ownership is irrelevant. What's relevant is control and personal reward. Thus to me it would make no difference whether the stock in a corporation were owned by private groups or by a collection of states...what matters is that the control is vested in an individual who is not the representative of a government, and is at most an indirect agent of one. (Adam Smith didn't consider such scenarios, because he disliked corporations, though he did admit that they were occasionally needed...e.g., it would have been difficult to come to another means of dealing with the situation handled by "The Lord Mayor and Corporation of London".)

Not just that. They would rather watch football or Game of Thrones than the current iteration of The Day the Universe Changed. It doesn't matter how much you impress random billionaires or the Ivory Tower education crowd.

You can provide the materials, but there's no gaurantee that anyone will want to use them.

On the other hand, The Great Courses see plenty of Torrent traffic. There's certainly demand for the stuff. Just less than for Expendables 3.

Dunno about LoC's but this is equal to about a single Archos 5.

When these prices come down, I will finally have a reason to retire the old thing (my Archos 5).

One arbitrary roller-coaster is as good as another.

If you accept quantum theory (and just try to disprove it) then the perceptible universe is cannonically isomorphic to a subset of mathematics. If cannonically isomorphic isn't close enough to identity for you, I'd like an explanation of why not. (Well, except that several different things can have aspects that are cannonically isomorphic to the same thing...but perhaps that's just a way of saying that they have certain features that are essentially identical.)

You've been trolled by the GP.

I don't think that's an educated guess. MS took a basically secure operating system and redesigned it by taking out all the secure features. True, this was done before the web was common, but they were the ones that did it. Starting to reimplement them in later versions of MSWind doesn't sufficiently mitigate their creating the problem in the first place.

I've gotten one of them, but I'm afraid I was too impatient to hold him long. Eventually I told him I'd just been reading about them.

If they're cold calling, they're scammers. 90%+ certainty. Some of them may not know it. Perhaps.

I don't think you understand the justification for the existence of copyright. The grant of a temporary monopoly is not the purpose, it's the payment. And the word temporary should be strongly emphasized. Originally it was, IIRC, 17 years, and there are many arguements that this is now too long a period of time.

If people could get a fair trial, then the law wouldn't need to change. But how, pray tell, are you going to accomplish that? One of the purposes of the civil forfeiture laws is to prevent you from being able to hire a decent lawyer. (Mind you, even if you could get a decene lawyer, a fair trial would mean that if you were found not guilty not only would all your expenses be recompensed, but also you would be paid at a fair rate for all the time you were compelled to spend and the personal endangerment that you endured.)

So, yes, the law needs to change. But that is not nearly sufficient. The entire court system needs to be altered so that the accused does not unfairly bear the burden of a corrupt legal system. And somehow this needs to be done without creating a perverse incentive against finding someone innocent.

I think you need to look a bit closer at the history of the US. The persecution of minorities and less powerful is something that has a very long history in the US. They don't tend to cover it in grade school history, but if you read the actual histories, you'll see it.

OTOH, those who romanticize the Indians are equally wrong. They were more done to than doing, but they also weren't innocents. They were, however, less powerful, so they couldn't enforce treaties. You could also investigate how the Chinese and Irish immigrants were treated. Or the Italian, or Spanish, or...well, anyone who wasn't northern European. Also look into the history of child labor (although, to be fair, nobody had decent treatment of poor children near the top of their social concerns...though some claimed to do so, what they meant was religious instruction happened as well as economic bondage).