This is wrong, of course.

Humans have 3 unique cones. Less than 3 means some form of color blindness.

Women, by virtue of having 2 X chromosomes, have two slightly different codings for one of the 3 cones. Most of the time one is switched off but occasionally a woman may have both versions of that cone resulting in a 4th unique receptor. The difference is very minor and there is no evidence that this leads to superior color sensitivity or that their brain even realizes it has some additional information. The claim that women have better color vision is complete BS.

"Just because you're 60 and have been using these paradigms for the last 25 years doesn't mean everyone is happy with them."

Only an ageist bigot would cast an acquired skill as a liability. Once upon a time if we weren't "happy" that we lacked a skill we'd put in the time to learn it.

I'm impressed by the stupidity displayed in this comment.

If what you say is actually "the point of this", then you've proven your very first claim false. If the device is designed to recover lost energy in the motion of the center of mass, then there must be lost energy there unlike the motion of a pendulum. It's not a "bounce" if it requires "muscular energy" for its movement.

On a bicycle you absolutely have to move your leg up and forward with each pedal stroke. It cannot get there any other way. Now, the leg may be moved there by the effort of the other leg or it may not, but either way the energy comes from you and nowhere else.

You should probably just stop talking.

"Liberty is about having the right to be "openly racist, sexist, misogynist, transphobic, and homophobic", without fear of physical aggression."

No it's not.

"That's not to say there aren't consequences for one's actions..."

What you are saying is that consequences are equated to a denial of liberty.

"...but a free society isn't one that mandates everyone conform to specific belief system..."

Liberty and freedom aren't a belief system and they do not include the concept of freedom to deny liberty to others due to your belief system.

Bigotry proudly displayed!

This is why we should invest more in public education.

"You don't want to exert the effort to convince people of something, you would prefer just to force a specific belief system upon people through the govt."

Interestingly, that "belief system" you refer to is the central topic in the Declaration of Independence. The nation was founded on it and the government exists primarily in support of it. "...that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." isn't simply a belief system shared only by those with a gay agenda.

Well, black men are men and homosexual men are men, so if you think service has never been refused to those men by the businesses you list then you are willingly uninformed. As for "winning a discrimination lawsuit" some have and many haven't, but this type of action is already recognized as both unacceptable and often illegal, otherwise there wouldn't be an interest in a law to preserve the discrimination.

"Furthermore, most of the "civil rights successes of the last sixty years" have to do with race, and race is not an issue of Christianity for any but a very few loonies."

Wow, you couldn't be any more ignorant.

"This whole subject has come up because a small bunch of homosexuals are trying to make other people miserable."

And an bigot as well.

So by answering yes the black printer is forced to do the work for free? You seem to have a problem with logic.

To further this point, those who are enacting this law would in another time be Klansmen and the actions the law protects are those of the KKK. White supremacy is, after all, a "religious belief" ironically justified by the KKK through the death of a jew.

Society has no interest in forcing anyone to participate in anyone else's wedding. Recognizing gay weddings under the law is about equal rights and privileges, it is not about regulating what goes on in churches.

When the action of treating people equally conflicts with "religious beliefs" those beliefs are, in fact, bigotry.

Nice troll modded insightful. The law is to protect actions, not thoughts, and the organizers are punishing those who enact the law, not those who have bigoted thoughts.

But most likely NOT overjoyed to have a modern organ and he would take exception to the generalization that most "period" instruments "sound like shit".

JS Bach was first and foremost and organist, not a composer, and he was a master at voicing the world's great organs.

Basically, this comment is equivalent to saying that Antonio Stradivari would be overjoyed by today's violins because "period" violins sound like shit. Bach was revered as a musician and technician and was contracted to maintain the world's finest keyboard instruments.

"It does not take longer to get used to than the idiosyncrasies of other languages, ..."

That is true.

"and it does result in nicely indented code."

Sure, 0.01% of the time. Bad programmers produce bad code in Python too and most would properly indent their code regardless.

The fact remains that it's a BS design restriction even though it isn't nearly as hard to cope with as some claim. This choice shouldn't be made again.