He's innocent until proven guilty in the eyes of the law. That doesn't mean I have to or necessarily should assume he's innocent. Sorry, but fleeing to the border raises my eyebrows. On the other hand, he seems to be paranoid, so there's a chance that he fled even though he is innocent. But I don't have to presume innocence when evaluating the situation because I'm not acting as a juror.

Complete, unmitigated, 100% bullshit.

Most men I know wouldn't do that. If all the men you know would, you need to spend your time with a different group. This reeks of the "any man would rape a woman if he could get away with it" nonsense that floats around.

Here's a pretty good rebuttal to that farce of an article.

In short, the two authors are uber-libertarian economists who wanted to prove that lock-in is not real. And they used all of the dubious arguments one would need to support such a notion. Seriously.

There were many, many criticisms, including:
1) The fact that the control group contained 10 mice. That's right. 10 mice.
2) Risk didn't scale with dose
3) One of the authors is a homeopath, and both have a long history of making dubious (at best) claims about GMO
4) The rats who were given water laced with Round-Up lived longer than the control group. If you believe GMO causes cancer based on this study, you should also be trumpeting the fact that Round-Up seems to prevent cancer
5) The rats used develop tumors at a very high rate

The study is beyond flawed or problematic. It's worthless, and it should be disregarded entirely by serious scientists and policy-makers.

Don't base your opposition to GMO on that study:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/stevensalzberg/2012/09/24/does-genetically-modified-corn-cause-cancer-a-flawed-study/
http://www.geekosystem.com/no-corn-data-for-esfa/
...and many, many more.

Tigger? Do you use his tail as a golf club?

Obama's vacations are more like vacations. Bush made it his second office. Considering the fact that Bush spent, last I checked, three times as many days on vacation as Obama, he didn't really have much of a choice but to actually do some work while he was out there. Personally, I'd rather have the president work in the capital instead of flying everyone out to his remote ranch.

Yeah. He was only dealing with two wars.

Yeah, totally. Remember when we had that budget surplus? What a disaster.

Apple doesn't abide by Google's standard pricing. They had the biggest contract by far, and Google surely wanted to keep it. (Google just dropped Maps pricing by 88%, incidentally. They do need to turn a profit.)

The ultimate irony, however, is the fact that Apple would be whining about Google not being fair with their pricing. This is the same Apple who's launching countless lawsuits against Android manufacturers. If I were running Google, I wouldn't even negotiate with them. Nor would I submit a Google Maps app for iOS.

No, there is plenty to see here.

Maps and navigation are a big deal on smartphones. Phone calls are their most important function, but Internet browsing and maps/navigation vie for the second most important feature.

And no, Google Maps doesn't even begin to approach this failure. Not even close. Aside from the horrific rendering, missing roads, and an inability to find what should be obvious searches, it doesn't even attempt to duplicate useful functionaly present in Google Maps. Public transportation? Use 3rd-party apps. Walking directions? Lol who walks these days?

Apple fans agree.

I want a toaster to toast whatever I throw it in. That's an open toaster. A toaster than only toasts Wonder Bread, on the other hand, would be a closed toaster.

Evolution has nothing to do with the origin of life. It deals only with existing populations. Attacking evolution on these grounds is entirely unfair, and it misrepresents the logic and data that supports the theory. The vast majority of ID supporters seem more incensed by the notion that humans evolved just like any other animal, and I don't think it's fair for you to claim that they object to evolution simply because they're conflating it with a tangential field of study.

Again, a bounce effect. It's a bounce effect. It's a meaningless bit of visual flair that should not be patentable. The fact that you can be sued and lose based on something so trivial is the problem.

Oh wait, it's a bounce effect on a touchscreen device. I guess this should change things?

But they should have chosen the analysis that best fits what they determine to be the appropriate analysis, not which one punishes Samsung appropriately. Having multiple analyses does not free them of their obligation to follow the instructions and make their decision accordingly.

Not sure if it's a big deal, but they definitely borked that one.

As annoying as your shilling is, I'm a bit saddened to see that you aren't even trying these days.