People have gone from wasting money for CLAP ON lights to wasting money to have fucking apps in their refrigerators.

Let's all stop playing this "they're savvy people experimenting with a hobby" lie. No, they're people who are obsessed with minor materialistic technology, who buy all the latest WiFi enabled tech gadgets. They're gimmicks. They sell for what they are, not the problems they can actually solve. Their boxes of unopened gadgets line the closets, the floor, and the tables--depreciating by the day.

If someone wants to buy into the craze and own more things that can break in their house, as if things don't break enough already, that's fine--it really is. I'm not going to bash them for putting their money where they want. But I'm certainly not going to treat them with the respect that comes from something that involves actual thought, effort, and application of skills.

Think of plenty of dorky hobbies. Someone who spends ten hours a day playing with a hacky-sack at least learns some coordination skills. People who play chess can think moves ahead. But buying things to buy things is not a hobby. It's materialism. And it yields no fruits.

The clerks not only don't care, they are at least as pissed off as you are.

Because HE, not the markedroid idiot that came up with this marvelous idea, HE gets yelled at by paranoid customers who can't just say "don't wanna" but have to make an insanely huge deal out of it. It is seriously in the clerks best interest to enter as many bogus addresses as he possibly can get away with, hoping that eventually the whole shit gets dumped because it causes more trouble than it's worth.

Phone number?
911
Erh... that's the emergency number?
Yeah, and I'd really wish I could be there when your autodialer calls it and your markedroid has to explain it to the pissed off 911 agent.

After all, they have to make sure that tax is paid on this transaction!

Why rely on luck?

Are you sure?

Maybe you can only get it from one of their resellers, but if not, I bet you can get your nukes from AliExpress.

It's not clear whether by "gay person" you mean someone attracted to the same gender or someone who has sexual relations with the same gender. In either case, Jesus would interact with them like he would interact with anyone else--with love.
The story of the woman caught in adultery shows his actions clearly:
John 8:11: “Then neither do I condemn you,”Jesus declared. “Go now and leave your life of sin.”

But this law isn't just about dealing with, talking to, or being friendly toward any group of people. It's about forcing people to participate in activities that they view as evil. http://www.theatlantic.com/pol...

If I owned a printing shop, I would refuse to produce material for the Westboro Baptist Church. Similarly, it seems reasonable to me that a evangelical Christian photographer should be able to politely decline to participate in a homosexual wedding.

You should have the right to decline work that compromises your morals. I have a friend who is vegan, and he turned down a website job at a hunting magazine. That was his right.

Part of the premise to the problem is that you know it will work. If you'd rather, you can look at the scenario of a doctor with several dying patients who need transplants deciding to kill one of his other patients to save the lives of all of the others. It's a question of where the boundaries to sacrificing one to save multiple becomes troubling to people. Knowing how to define these boundaries are critical to being able to program acceptable "morality" in robots.

Sexual orientation is not a choice.

Sexual behavior is a choice.

Does it make you uncomfortable the idea that we are creating reality through our very consciousness? That sounds like woo-woo new-age shit, but one can interpret quantum mechanics in that way. The past and future do not exist except in our minds. The only time that truly exists is Now. Everything that has ever happened and ever will happen is happening now. We are choosing, through our consciousness, which part of that to experience.

Woo Woo! ;-)

Funny, that never seems ot work when the elementary school teacher also dances at the local strip club. Then it's never about non-discrimination based on job performance and all about your employer's right to not associate with you anymore. Let's face it, you've picked some attributes that have hardly anything to do with your job performance like race, religion, sex etc. and "blessed" them while other equally irrelevant attributes can get you fired on the spot.

I'm not sure why you need to put "forced" in quotes. If you're a white supremacist running a self-owned bakery and wouldn't serve a black customer voluntarily, then clearly it's involuntary aka forced. As forced as the health and safety regulations and paying your employees minimum wage I guess, but it's something the government tells you that you must do. Now I know certain libertarians try to make great leaps of logic to act like they're different, but fundamentally they're not. If you want to throw out all government regulation, you also throw out what keeps the baker from refusing to serve the black guy.

So you have no problem with a smelting company opening next door to your house? A garbage dump? Fat rendering?

Zoning is done for a common sense reason, one you obviously fail to grasp.

Python's string library isn't remotely what I'd call "overweight", but its strings are immutable. Some algorithms that are quick in other languages are slow in Python, and some operations that are risky in other languages (like using strings for hash keys) are trivial (and threadsafe) in Python. But regardless of the language involved, it's always a good idea to have a bare minimum of knowledge about it before you do something completely stupid.

That won't happen. Ketchup is a non-newtonian fluid: its viscosity changes with shear force, and so it refuses to flow until adequate force is applied. That's why ketchup doesn't leave the bottle with gentle force, but spurts out when squeezed. It will retain its shape just fine until forced out.

Heinz will collapse as a company and be bought by Kraft or something stupid while Hunts goes on to advertise to housewives that they can get that last squirt with their bottle.

How much do they save by you rebuying a teaspoon of ketchup once a month? Ketchup bottles are already refillable.

How much brand name exposure would they get to be the only company with the "unstickable" bottles? Ketchup bottles that are squirty without whacking required (the new plastic-sphincter caps), sit on their lids not their base, etc. have actually increased sales of (technically smaller) bottles in many industries. Hell, in the UK you can buy squirty mint sauce and it costs more than normal mint sauce despite being smaller. People STILL buy it.