No, that's kinda the point of evolution. The species that adapted best to it's habitat - or even was already best equipped for that niche- out-survived those that didn't. Random mutations create variety in a species, those mutations which "fit" the local environment better somehow gave that particular lineage an advantage over those lineages whose mutations (or lack thereof) didn't do them as much good there.

I love the quote, "Five hundred kilometres is pretty much as far as a normal person would want to drive in a single day." Oh, man, I've driven further to see a live show, and driven back essentially the next day

Indeed. Aren't things in Australia nearly as spread out as they are here? 300 miles is nothing. 300 miles won't even get you from Las Vegas to San Diego. I've done that as a same-day round trip. I've driven from Las Vegas to Denver in one day. 770 miles makes for a long day behind the wheel, but it's doable. You can cover 600 miles in 8 hours at 75 mph.

I wonder if PETA had anything to do with this article.

Many people misconstrue what Darwin meant by "fittest"; he didn't mean the most athletic or strongest, he meant the species that best fits it's habitat, or the most adaptable.

I'm trying to imagine a deep, chest rumbling, fear inducing, "BOKKKKK"


Nope.

Fuck off and die, troll. 7 billion people on the planet, we don't need your type. Besides, you're wrong.

I used to do this. It's surprising how many people have never heard of this. The downside is of course, discomfort. It's a tad hard to sleep with a hard lens in your eye, at least, it was for me. Also, I find contacts to be a lot of hassle; including the fact that washing my hands so much leads to cracks in my fingertips in wintertime.

Still, I think maybe more people should give it a shot. If you miss a night or two, it's no big deal, which is a nice plus. If you stop wearing them at night altogether, it takes your eyes about 2 weeks to go back to their natural state.

I tried that with contacts, personally I hated it. I got headaches, and it seemed more like a lose/lose than a win/win. It varies from person to person.
If you do that with LASIK, it's permanent. I'd highly recommend getting some contacts first and trying the monovision thing on a trial basis first.

It's wise to wait on LASIK til later years if presbyopia is just around the corner; for me, it's already here and settled in. My conundrum is choosing between leaving my vision as is and needing glasses for distance, or getting the LASIK and needing reading glasses. I'm hoping that such an operation might lead to a side benefit of reduced presbyopia too, but I haven't done my research on that yet.

So my question is: what is holding everyone else back from freeing themselves from contacts and glasses?

I don't need contacts or glasses, you insensitive cl...oh, wait.

So if you could remake the world you would be a serf? Because under feudalism that's your only choice, and it doesn't matter how smart you are or how hard you work, your circumstance will NEVER improve.

If I were a serf, I'd be obliged to pay the landowner 1/3 of what I produced on his land. Given that I now pay considerably greater percentage than that in various taxes, serfdom doesn't look like that bad of a deal. My circumstances then, as now, would be determined by how well I made use of the resources at my disposal.

If you're under the delusion that YOU would fare differently because you're (ahem) *special*, realize that what enables that delusion is the democracy and equality GIVEN to you by previous generations of socially conscious activists.

The only thing your democracy and equality have produced is a society where the parasites to vote themselves a living out of the pockets of the productive. Repeat after me: All men are not created equal. Never have been, never will be.

There are only so many chairs at the top, and NONE of them have your name on it peasant.

Neither mine or yours, either then or now. What of it?

"Equality" is the most evil word ever introduced into political discourse. Followed closely by "democracy".

As for income equality, I'll note the feudalism was a stable political structure for over a thousand years. How's liberal democracy looking after 200 and change?

google broke into internet search with the page rank algorithm whose essential purpose is to combat "search engine optimization."

Yeah. They destroy legitimate businesses with their wonderful algorithms...

SEO isn't a legitimate business. If your website is getting pushed into the search-result basement, odds are you're doing it wrong.

I think most doctors believe its beneficial but I also think they somehow see acetaminophen opiate formulations as some kind of bulwark against abuse. Either because they believe it is so much more effective paired with acetaminophen and you'll be inclined to take less overall or that people "know" acetaminophen is bad in quantity and it will serve as a deterrent to excessive dosage, especially people with a history of drug abuse.

Also, the DEA watches doctors who prescribe opiates very carefully. If some government goon believes a doctor's handing them out like candy, the doctor's most likely going to be called in for some very uncomfortable questions. See chapter two of Three Felonies a Day for some examples.

The way scripts for opiates are handled is also quite different. My wife's oncologist was able to submit the vast majority of prescriptions to her preferred pharmacy electronically; they would be ready for pick-up a short time after. The one time she was prescribed straight oxycodone (or whatever opiate), it was printed on security paper to thwart attempts at altering or copying. It was signed, and some sort of DEA ID number issued to the doc was printed in the header. I had to deliver the prescription to a pharmacy. Her usual pharmacy didn't have it in stock, so I had to find another that did. Once it was filled, I had to sign for it in a logbook (similar to when you buy products containing pseudoephedrine).

Honestly, I don't think I've heard but a handful of americans saying that it's fine when we do it.. Pretty much everyone is up in arms over the NSA. What I hear people say - if unapologetically- is that the NSA isn't the only one doing it. And you'll probably never hear much about what the KGB does (I know that's more an equivalent to the CIA than the NSA but I'm not sure if Russia sets up their organizations like the US does).

Still, Google may have a presence in India but it's not an Indian company, per se.

At this rate, it seems like someday in the future we may have to deal with possibility that being on the Internet is like being a celebrity: no expectation of privacy.

Yes actually, I do expect there to be some sympathy. Because everyone bitches when the NSA does it. Every other country does it's sharing of spying too, let's not be naive. Wrong is wrong, no matter who does it. This was clearly wrong, they targeted another country's corporation, and one that has a huge impact on the Internet, worldwide.
It's only fair that you either get to protest when every and any country pulls something like this, or not at all.