You are right about the wires but wrong about the demand pattern in case of a localized emergency.

For POTS, the telephone is at a fixed location (obviously close to the accident in the parent's example), therefore, in an emergency, the person is more likely to be trying to get help for an emergency which happened near or at that location.

Those with POTS are not calling to tell someone that they are going to be late coming home, because they already are home.

In contrast, mobile phone users near such an accident trigger many calls unrelated to reporting the accident (telling someone they are running late) and overload the cell network.

Most people living close enough to such an accident are not home, are not directly affected by the accident or are simply unaware of the emergency, and don't or can't call, therefore, the POTS will generally not overload (although you may overload the number of 911 or 112 operators).

Therefore, for an emergency covering a small area, POTS will almost always be better.

For emergencies covering a larger area that might overload the POTS system (8.5 earthquake, a hurricane or such), you have other problems anyway.

And avoid oral sex for several hours after this. Don't ask me how I know this.

No, it's too easy ...

Sorry, but "bare back access" was so titillating that it distracted me from finishing the rest of your post...

AIt doesn't just sound draconian, it is. A friend of mine was an ethnic Russian child living in Kazakhstan at the time. Her father lost his job simply because he was Russian so they HAD to leave. The majority of these people (in either direction) are not moving of their own free will.

That coffee is so bad, that it isn't legal in Europe anyway.

"What's that mommy?" "Why, Jimmy, that's an airplane".
I am not a programmer so could someone explain to me how that is different?

I have hunted in the past. There, I admit it.

However, I think the question for me is not, should they be allowed to hunt these animals but should they be allowed to hunt them in such an obviously cruel and hideous manner?

Actually, the story is more complicated than you suggest. Two things were happening at the same time. Humans began eating meat (but not exclusively) and they started cooking their food, making it easier to digest.

Just one example, humans ARE different than even the great apes in terms of their digestive systems.

Humans probably are omnivores but have many special adaptions, including jaw sizes more like herbivores, not (only) because of hard foods but also to allow us to smile, another important element of our evolution (social development).

Wrong. Since the most research in Europe is carried out in the countries with the highest labor costs, your statement is misleading, as it skews the costs relative to the GDP of the region.

Also, Switzerland is always ignored in these calculations. I know they are not part of the EU but a quick peek at the graph in the original article shows Europe, not EU (I know they state EU in the fine print). Switzerland has a very vibrant research community (think physics, biotech, pharma) and it seems silly to exclude them. But another example of a country with high labor costs which spends a lot on research (and gets something back).

Stupid question about a "point" particle: The minimal size (diameter?) for anything would then be a Planck length, right?

Unless you are a corporation or belong to the 1%

Maybe he is ass talking (I leave it as an exercise for the reader to determine how).

However, there was such an experiment done in the 1970's and the result was much as he described: Rosenhan Experiment

How may 16 year olds like a fine glass of Bordeaux? Few. How many 40 year olds? Probably many more. I'm not saying that they will like eBooks as they grow older people's tastes change as they mature and if you don't know for sure how they will change, your statement may not be valid.

I would be happy to see the ceiling even set at 50 fold (lowest earner in the company).

Having said that, one worry I have is that one possible outcome is that the CEO outsources, say, the low paid cleaning staff and can therefore raise his/her salary. Next step, replace all assembly line workers with robots (yes, I know, already happening, but this might accelerate the process).

How would you prevent this?