The cloud is not trustworthy, it was shown to not be many times over and no sane enterprise will allow the cloud to take over local desktops/servers.

Unless it's cheaper. Then as long as nothing happens, managers get bonuses for the savings their decisions have earned the company, and if something does, it's an unforeseeable event that was the fault of some evil haxor.

TLDs have certain requirements associated with them, unless Amazon magically also has some super special secret deal that Google hasn't told the world about after losing ... then Amazon won't be able to monopolize or otherwise use the TLD to an unfair advantage.

And yet that's exactly what Amazon will do. Even if they run their registry business as a separate department, the conflict of interests is always there. It's exactly like an ISP who also provides content has an incentive to make connections to Netflix suck.

Perhaps it would be best to simply forbid companies from expanding to arbitrary new segments?

Blocky, pixellated sex, I imagine.

Kind of like the GIFs we downloaded from BBSes in the 1990s.

My safe word is "ZMODEM".

Why, I haven't had five bees in my pocket since nineteen-diggety-two, when the Kaiser stole the twenty. You could get 40 rods to the hogshead back then.

So it's a done deal, then? It's no wonder the UK is in the state it's in, with your epidemic of naivete.

It's more because the grape is full of slippery fluid when is squishes. Not too many people are skinny enough to actually roll on a grape. Maybe Kelly Ripa.

"Hell, if I could headbutt another human into oblivion for a mate, I would too. Here's the funny thing folks, humans are animals too! We have all the same urges and evolutionary pressures,"

As any male should know who went to high school. What do you think all that bullying was about? Guys were showing their dominance to win females. Those same urges were why it was so hard for the guys being picked on to just shrug it off or ignore it - how can a male shrug off being humiliated in front of potential mates?

You're right. In a one-on-one fight there is some sense in not killing your rival if he's willing to back down so that you don't have to expend extra energy trying to finish him off.

But when the battle becomes group against group the advantage of mercy is less clear. An enemy left alive has more choices. Rather than accepting that he can't defeat you he may come back with larger numbers. He may jump up and hit you from behind as soon as you turn to battle one of his companions.

In an environment of tribal warfare, it doesn't make sense to kill your local intra-tribal rival because he's likely to be your ally in the next inter-tribal battle.

This is a case where new science seems to confirm the common sense that old science was questioning. Of course chimps evolved to fight. They fight for the same reasons human tribes fight - competition for resources (including breeding females as a resource).

You're saying Saharan sand is good fertilizer? I wouldn't have though it was true, but if it is I have to wonder if it opens up an opportunity. We take sand from the Sahara to fertilize lands elsewhere - taking it all from one place to begin with. Once we've dug enough sand out to make an area below sea level, we can flood it with water from the Mediterranean Sea.

Benefits:
* More fertile land throughout the world
* A new sea where fish can grow.
* A way to slow or even reverse the rise of the oceans by putting the excess water in the new sea.

Am I crazy? Why?

Go to a city and sniff. You can smell how dirty they are. I was in NY (Manhattan) a while back and the smell of trash was quite common even in areas that seemed to be quite nice and expensive.

I spent quite a bit of time in the American midwest. It is hardly unpopulated. And if it were any more populated than it already is, where would we get our food from?

Why would you think that they could not twist being treated like "normal" criminals as something special?

They can try and probably will. Think of it as attacking a heavily fortified bunker rather than open field; sure, it can be done, but it's a lot harder.

In the US, Muslim recruiting is prisons is very effective.

But this is only a problem if you buy Islamic State's claim of being a Caliphate and thus representing all Muslims. Otherwise we're just looking at criminals finding religion and straightening up, which is hardly a bad thing. And that again gets us into this being primarily a war between competing stories, rather than physical militaries.

Liars are gonna lie, nothing you do is going stop that.

Which is precisely why their story needs to be contradicted rather than confirmed at every turn.

Wars seldom end through peaceful negotiations. They end because one side completely and utterly destroys the other.

Well, no. A war most often ends in a negotiated truce. Otherwise most still-existing nations would have no lost ones in their history.

Then again, I can see you're working through some personal issues here, so I guess facts are of little importance. But perhaps you could choose some topic where you won't cause actual damage by venting?

I'm not sure if you should be modded Funny or Insightful.