Setting aside the sheer depravity of this argument, we have ample historical context for what happens when society cuts off the neediest. France, Haiti, Cuba, China, Russia, Algeria, Egypt, India, Scotland, The Phillipines, Mexico--just to name a few places where social and political inequality have driven massive, bloody revolts.

Wealth and political power calcify with the already wealthy and powerful. The middle and working classes slowly lose what wealth they have through attrition. Poverty becomes a virtually inescapable sink of destitution. Eventually, enough people end up having quite literally nothing to lose that you get vicious, deadly, destructive revolutions that take generations to recover from.

If you insist on taking a "pragmatic" view of not even bothering to -try- to improve the lives of the impoverished, try to at least understand the historical ramifications of what you're arguing for.

I don't mean easier as in effort- just in the scientific sense of having hypothesis or theories that are provable experimentally. Obviously nobody would have been willing to fund the LHC unless there was good reason to believe both the experimental and theoretical rigueur existed to support it.

Try to think of a biomedical experiment on the same level that would justify the expense- you can't because the field is much too complex.

Try reading "Faculty of 1000" it is close to what you seek. Also Nature and Science also have small articles flagging cool results even if they are in other journals with informed comementaries.

It's much easier to design experiments for the physical sciences than the biomedical sciences.

I agree it's not a problem. As can be seen at Retraction Watch, lots of bad science if found out and retracted. That's a good thing not a bad thing. One could ask how much of published science is made up and undetected but a better question would be how many results are simply crappy in the data or crappy in the analysis. It surely dwarfs the latter. But who cares. If the result is important it will be replicated. if it's not important then no one will cite it.

ultimately it's the well cited articles that also get vetted by reproduction. Those constitute the body of science moving forward. the rest goes into the gutter of history.

In skiing the saying is, if you fall and your fall isn't forward your not being aggressive enough. It's the same in science. People will make errors. If they weren't then then were not paying for aggressive enough research.

If you find this funny, stop for a moment and consider WHY it is you find this funny.

Because it isn't in the slightest. Having this as the accepted reality of state formation in human society speaks volumes of us as species.

I use several anti tracking plugins and I've noticed that when I switch to a different browser without them the page load time is much faster. I also have googled safe surf turned on which blocks evil sites. In starting to think these tracking blockers and stuff slow things down. They don't really stop tracking since the blockers or google safe surf are middlemen who can track you.

Thus I would welcome a unified approach to protecting myself that was actually faster

yES!! if the TYPICAL voter does not understand why the vote is secure the method fails. this is virtually the turing rest for any proposed schema.

Someone needs to write one of those form letters we have for why someones proposal to end spam will fail for all these stupid people who think the problem is crytography.

I think my first programming attempt was recreating pong on a timex zx80 that I had checked out from the library.

I think 'being run over a truck' was loose way of saying 'dying in a traffic accident'

King Joulian says he expands the mostest and has a magentically attractive mating dance.

I wasn't arguing that a contract with a professional photographer means anything to people attending, just that they have the ability to restrict vendors to these events. The student running around taking pictures and then selling them online could be construed as acting as a vendor.

We get the politicians we deserve.

What about "other peoples code" did you not understand. I'm not talking about reading my own code.

yes everyone gets burned by that one time. then it's a non-issue.