You call him an ignorant liar, but it is your analysis that is the ignorant lie.

There's a thing in medicine called outcomes analysis. When all is said and done, does a new drug save more lives? The Niacin-based one did what it was supposed to do -- raise HDL, the good cholesterol. But outcomes analysis of "hard endpoints" (heart attacks, strokes, and death) showed no difference. So something else is going on.

Now that is harder to do on a national level, but he did point out suicide rates were similar. So: outcomes, no difference.

Your bleat (and that is what it is -- a crafted talking point fed to the hoi polloi) reminds me of the argument analyzing calorie signs in restaurants.

Supporters point out (a carefully-crafted sophistry) that most people "take that info into consideration".

Outcomes analysis: With signs up, the average person orders 100 calories more than when the signs are removed.

You could be replaced by a robot. You wanna be sick and tired of something? Look in the mirror.

What if I put on dark eye makeup and made grunting woooo oooooo sounds?

My company uses Notes. It's slow because it's managing a 2 gb database locally of my last 6 months of email.

23 years and five companies ago Notes was pretty cool -- all our little offices dialed each other once in awhile and swapped emails and other info (message boards, e.g.).

There is nothing inherently unethical in not paying for every last idiocy some power-hungry government official can convince enormous masses of ignoranti is a good idea.

Treating all of it as some Holy Good such that resisting is unethical is far more unethical...and historically dangerous to freedom.

> If everything legally permissible is deemed morally acceptable then humanity is doomed.

Skipping out on taxes illegally is morally permissible.

It's the meme that government is some Holy and Wise spender of your money, such that dodging it is unethical, that is dooming humanity. "Pay their fair share"? Insofar as that insensate statement has any meaning, it was crossed 20 percentage points ago.

This is on-topic...unless you think the purpose of this thread is to gather ourselves together into a group hive mind to reinforce your meme by regurgitating it to each other and feeling Good about Ourselves.

Tools of real phenomena: growing and spreading disease-like memes. That is the doom of humaniy.

Government does this crap to private businesses all the time. I love the turnabout.

Detroit approved three casinos, giving them a contract which included tax rates, then jacked the taxes up a few years anyway. Government doesn't have to work hard to make unethical operations like casinos (and those granted legal monopoly status at that) look like abused victims.

It does no good coming from your own body. I guess nerds are fucked.

I mean, not fucked.

At the same time, a group of four judges strongly disagreed on the significance of the computer limitation. Chief Judge Rader, writing for this group, said that "a computer programmed to perform a specific function is a new machine with individualized circuitry created and used by the operation of the software." Similarly Judge Moore wrote for this same group of four judges that "a general purpose computer in effect becomes a special purpose computer once it is programmed to perform particular functions pursuant to instructions from program software," on the theory that software "effectively rewires a computer."

Someone needs to slap the cowards in Congress to clarify this w.r.t. a "general-purpose machine".

Merely shoving some algorithm that is done by hand onto a computer is nothing novel. This isn't to say a particularly clever and non-intuitive software implementation couldn't be patented. But just doing it in software is not novel; it is obvious.

Software is indeed a virtual -- and specialized -- machine -- that is the idea behind computers as "generel-purpose machines". But not in the legal sense driving patents: novel and non-obvious innovation.

I keep recommending these rules:

1. If it's already being done in the real world, doing it on a computer is not patentable per se.

2. Doing a simulation of a real-world item is similarly not patentable per se.

3. Doing something wirelessly formerly done over a network, or remotely formerly done locally, or on a lil' phone or tablet or tricorder, is also not patentable per se.

4. This is not to say particularly clever implementations (the "machine" part of "virtual machine") could not be patented.

There, follow those rules, cowardly Congress, and you protect patentable innovation while eviscerating a ton of current patent problems.

Kaiser Permanente introduced the vaccines gradually, and have children of the same age with one or the other (or both). This is the source of the 5.6x more likely to get it number.

The older one has more antigens. The older one also had more lawsuits, even though science to this day cannot prove it caused the other problems.

And statistically we'd still be better off with the old one, unproven problems and all, compared to the new one. But there was a telling comment by a scientist -- western societies would no longer "accapt" the old one.

Thank your lawyers. They got rich (Congress even set up a fund for "victims", even though no connection was shown) and people died in increased numbers because of their actions.

From TFA

By Thursday, attention had shifted to some larger names in the tech industry. The day began with complaints over Amazon only paying £2.4m tax in the UK last year. This was despite making sales of £4.3bn and receiving £2.5m in government grants, so effectively Amazon cost the country £100,000 over 2012.

Did she take into account the savings Amazon made to private citizens? Did she take into account reductions in global emissions due to shared delivery trucks?

Do not assume the only thing going on is all government-oriented. Certain factions want you to think that way, but don't. Walmart saves the US consumers over $200 billion per year.

They seized 60 million records of 10 million people because of 1 possible tax cheat? Nice.

To paraphrase a wise man recently, "I don't want to see who's getting slapped on the wrist. I want to see who's going to jail."

Eventually, your kind will attempt to invade with real-world laws. You are part of a giant, hyper organism whose parts, humans, can be directed by data streams that "warm your heart" and "make you feel like a Good Person".

We understand this. You don't.

My dad refused to pay for touch tone in the US, and he had his ancient, black Bakelite indestructible phone upstairs for decades. It was idiotic for the phone company, which had long since converted to computers for both signal types. But they wanted to charge for the "premium" touch tone.

As for this, the company claims it's required nationwide by regulation. Fair enough. Show the money went for 911 elsewhere, and not oopsidentally into your pocket.

Roger Ebert lamented that this, and James Bond, had turned into action movies lead by action heroes.

It doesn't make them bad movies -- they are pretty good on their own terms. They're just...different.

Have they ruled out dogs peeing, kids peeing, asses with an axe to grind peeing, copper or other poisons in the pot, or other assholery? More likely than experimental error or bias in dirt or planting or seed selection.

Does the router bloe hot air?

I misspelled blow, but I think I stumbled across a funnier spelling, so I'm leaving it.