The effective solution is suing these PR firms, who directed their employees to do things inherently violating Wiki's terms of service and which can be found liable for civil damages in degrading the quality of Wiki's product, which is supposed to follow the terms of service.

The outcome of that would be PR firms would just have their sockpuppets build up a history of 'good editing' so that their PR-shill edits will not be challenged. Alot of that can be done by automated means, e.g. scanning articles for generic grammar issues, minimal human input to verify it makes sense, and you can have a large number of 'good editing' events build up.

Of course rudder position doesn't indicate heading, which is why I did'nt write that. But if GPS spoofing is to "take over navigation without pilot detection" and divert a ship or plane from it's straight line path, that means the rudder needs to turn to achieve that adjusted path... Which the pilots would be able to detect if an autopilot initiates it, and if they are not on autopilot, GPS spoofing alone cannot "take over navigation".

They can spoof the GPS position which plots on a navigational map, but if the ship is not moving in a straight line that means the rudder (or steerable propulsion pods) need to move, which have their own indicators. If the steering is locked to a wheel, the ship will not turn unless that wheel turns.

FYI, that is the definition of capitalism.

Sure, but this isn't a permanent ban, it's a ban for two years only (IMHO 3 years would be better in order to get solid data analyzed from 2 years of results). As the article mentions, the country that is doing fine (Australia) doesn't have a mite problem, so for countries that do have a mite problem, it seems a valid question to assess whether nicotinoids (or any other potential cause/amplifier) play any role in causing or amplifying the syndrome. When mites can be satisfactorily repressed, then allowing a regime similar to Australia is reasonable, until then a different regime may be called for. I don't see what the article's comments about perfect apples are about, if there are no other effective, legal pesticides to spray, then there may not be 'perfect no mark, no bug apples' for the next 2-3 years if that is what it takes to assess neonicotinoids. If there are other options (nicotine!?), they may work. But neonicotinoids are not a natural feature, there is no inherent right to spread poisonous chemicals in the environment, so nobody should have any expectation of a right to the results of nicotinoid use. Mankind survived without neonicotioids, and with 'imperfect apples', so having a real scientific assessment of with/without neonicotinoids for 2-3 years probably won't mean the end of human civilization.

...And the topic of the thread is what is happening in the EU, not the US: In the EU corn syrup (high fructose or not) is not widely used as it is in the US, where it's widespread usage is largely due to agribusiness subsidies to corn farmers, without those and sugar tariffs there would be little reason to use (high fructose) corn syrup rather than other sources of sugar. High-fructose corn syrup (the sweetener of mass-market soft drinks in the US) is also linked to increased diabetes outcomes, even compared to normal sources of sugar (which also are, but to a lesser extent).

So it seems the study basically is demonstrating that some people are more amenable to a symbol of authority telling them what they actually think/believe. Although the extent to which it is important that the authority is perceived to be 'neutral' isn't clear from the study.

This is about supercomputers used for scientific modelling, not servers for banks or infrastructure.

well, the Economist has an article about how reasonability or civility is exactly the succesful political trait in Sweden and 'Scandinavia'.

uncivil comments polarizing viewers was not the primary point of the article/study. it's point was the comments expousing the exact same basic argument had different effect based on the writer's civility, and this was most strongly seen in viewers with weak personal views/familiarity on the subject to begin with, i.e. the vast majority of readers/ the general populace. this is contrasted with pre-internet norms of topical debate where uncivility was simply much less of a factor due to social constraints.

sure, but for any given semi-specialized subject, the vast majority of people don't care that much about it... and in a democratic (or mob-ocratic) system/structure, this is shifting what the SLIGHT preferences of this majority or near-majority is, which can change what the over-all majority opinion is.

Good summary of the real motivations of the carriers with these 'alternate' OS's. Those who can use unlocked phones may benefit from the growth of alternate OS's using vanilla OS builds and independent apps stores... But what I don't get is how these alternate OS's really 'benefit' the network providers (with aspirations to be more than that): Android can already be used outside of Google's dictate, you simply can't use Google applications or Store. But if you use some other entirely different OS, you also are not using Google's Android apps, or it's Store... So what's the difference? (incidentally, I would say that loss of Google Map application is the biggest deal, Stores can be replicated)

"âoeEvery time we came up with a new idea we spawned two or three companies that would try to exploit it" I mean, doesn't this obvious violation of the holy IP rights monopoly lead to the destruction of western society and the end of all innovation? Oh whoops, it did the opposite in this case... Same as how when software patents didn't exist yet, and same as when wheels and axles couldn't be patented...

well, i think it would be enlightening if you wanted to tally up their successes achieved with this budget. rus-m? vostochny? glonass (the last certainly CAN be a success, but not yet)