I think you're really overstating the significance of MtGox. BitInstant was a much bigger deal for me and most other people I know, and that incident didn't destroy bitcoin. In fact there's also several other incidents that were a much bigger deal.

I'd imagine it falls under the commerce clause. Remember, the drug war and countless other prohibitions is based on the fact that the government can arrest you for something you grow in your house and consume only yourself, because that affects interstate commerce since you might have otherwise bought it from a source that might cross state lines. Given that expansive interpretation, which the courts have upheld every time except one, how is everything that happens on a plane actually crossing state lines not fair game? And you might think this is wrong and support pot legalization, but it's also equally applicable to cocaine and heroin. Which come from plants, by the way. Plants which I can grow entirely on my land, extract alkaloids, sell to no one, and be thrown in prison for the rest of my life for.
But guns on the other hand... perhaps someone can help me reconcile US v. Lopez with the constitutionality of the CSA as applied to wholly intrastate actions.

This.

How's about a poll about whether or not to go forward with beta? Then you can show us just how much everyone loves it and only a tiny minority wants it scrapped entirely! Tiny incremental improvements will change all our minds right!

So where's the poll? Oh that's right, having a >90% against it will make the opposition even more clear, and get the casual users wondering why something so horrendously unpopular is being shoved down everyone's throat.

Just like dashcams right? Instead I think we'll just see 4 Google Glass fail at the same time instead of 4 dash cams failing at the same time, at the exact time abuse is alleged to have occurred.

As a 6-digit user I resent that. The beta is terrible and needs to be entirely scrapped.

And the absolute worst part is this bullshit they're feeding us about how they're listening to our feedback and making incremental improvements. It's fucking insulting. 99% of commenters seem to want the thing gone entirely, but they're not listening to us. They're shoving a horrible design down our throats and completely disregarding everyone that doesn't agree with them.

I guess the >95% of people that want the whole thing scratched, taking a tiny amount of time, are being contradicted by the tiny minority that wants a new, dumbed down design, which takes a long time. And you listen to the latter. Fantastic management.

You can stick all the flowers you want in a pile of shit, it's still going to smell like shit. GET IT THROUGH YOUR HEADS: INCREMENTALLY IMPROVING SOMETHING THAT EVERYONE WHO CONTRIBUTES WANTS ENTIRELY GONE WILL KILL THE PART OF THE USERBASE THE REST OF THE WORLD COMES HERE FOR.

The purpose of criminal justice is to keep bad people from harming society.

Yes, and politicians act out of the common good to serve the interest of society as a whole. And a Good and Just Lord protects all the little babies and bunny rabbits from harm.

Utah folded. Only death row inmates who chose firing squad before the law change in 2004 can still be executed that way. There are 3 presently.

On a cursory search, the first charts seem to suggest that at a viewing distance of 10' (hardly super close), that 4k becomes visible with a display as small as 25-35". At 20', between 50-60", which due to falling prices is quite a common screen size for new tvs. Some other charts vary a bit, but you're definitely exaggerating.

Personally I think we all ought to skip 4k and go straight to 8k, because 4k isn't enough of an improvement.

It's a good thing making something illegal completely stops it from occurring.

By your logic, we should only have one party if votes are to be meaningful, and clearly that is the opposite of the truth.

We do only have one party that can win at the national level. It has two sects which differ slightly on some aspects of some issues.

Pretty good folk would never drag you off in chains, imprison you, and brand you with life-destroying felon labels for something you do alone in the privacy of your own home. Every cop has done or would do this. End of story.

Here you go, courtesy of my mothers AARP magazine. Nothing new and scary there, just a phone.

And if that compartment is actually full of drugs and you didn't know? (This sort of thing has in fact happened).

Personally I think laws against both are unconstitutional, but that's not the best argument. Good luck ever convincing anyone in the legal system you didn't know.

I second that. It's well established that intelligence is associated with strong belief in social justice and right/wrong in general. There's a very strong argument that taking drugs is not wrong, and drug laws are a great social injustice in countless ways. How can you respect laws that are so obviously wrong if your morality isn't based on external dictations?