A large number of cases, huh? And what is that number, exactly? Have there been dozens of cases? Hundreds? Do you even know?

If you don't want to trust the FDA's certification of this medicine as safe when administered under a doctor's supervision, that's your prerogative. What about the WHO, which includes it on their list of essential medicines? What about the EU's regulatory bodies, who are famous (or infamous, depending on perspective) for their abundance of caution, yet also certify this drug as safe when used under a doctor's care.

There are cases where people have died, yes. Often it comes out that these people drank aquarium cleaner, having mistaken it for the drug (there is in fact one type with a similar-sounding formula). In other cases they overdosed, in yet others there were interactions with other meds, and in a few there were the QT problems that get so mugh hype. All of these could have been prevented if a doctor had been properly supervising the use of these drugs: the side effects you mention do exist and are no joke, but these cases are preventable. So let doctors supervise.

This is why you can't get a date. Have you tried not being creepy?

There's a lot to be said for a marketplace of ideas in which credentials cannot be abused because identities are hard to verify. However, anonymity itself is not immune to its own forms of abuse, and as this article points out, the abuse of anonymity has run so rife, with such devastating effects, that some compelling arguments can be made that it may very well not have been worthwhile on balance.

If there were an easier way to dox and shame the abusers of anonymity, it might go a long way toward addressing anonymity's problems. Abuse the privilege, lose the privilege, and potentially a lot more besides.

Part of the problem is that we don't really have a good grasp of how long it generally takes life to form. We have some sense of how long it took for us, but not much of a way to know if this is fairly average, or unusually fast or slow.

Of all the sentient species that will ever exist in the universe, one of them must have developed first. That could be us.

You teach people like people as long as they are willing to be taught like people, and you assume they're willing until proven otherwise. That is only decent and good. Duh.

But some people refuse to learn like people. Compassion is giving people what they need, which does not always mesh so well with what they want. If what they need are sterner measures, so be it. They need to learn.

Am I missing something here? How the heck do you sustain a glide at even supersonic speeds, to say nothing of hypersonic, for any length of time? Without any thrust to keep the vehicle accelerating past the limits of air resistance, shouldn't it get jolted back to subsonic speeds extremely quickly (and probably catastrophically, from the perspective of the vehicle and anything in it)?

Or is this good old Soviet (neo-Soviet?) engineering/ingenuity being put to work again?

One could argue that the ties to real identity are exactly what make it social media: certainly your "avatar based social media" has not had the same kind of destructive effects, but one could argue that the fact of its basis in avatars disqualifies it as "social media" in the first place.

This isn't just snobbery. The reason you can't count avatars as social media is, in fact, the very same reason avatars don't have the same destructive effects as social media: it's all just pretend, and everyone knows it. The connecting power and destructive power of social media are inextricably linked to real identity, which avatars deliberately sever.

No, they do. They get their jollies from watching people in pain. It's pure sadism, nothing more.

Ever watch newborn puppies playing? It's not as cute as it sounds. There's yelping, and whimpering, and sometimes even blood, because the puppies haven't yet figured out that biting hurts. They don't learn except by being bitten. So, too, with bullies. Escalate as hard as you have to, and eventually they grow up and function.

3D is about immersing yourself in an illusory space. This works well for entertainment and certain specific kinds of education, but that's only a small part of what the Internet gets used for. Most of the time people are just looking to find and/or peruse information as quickly as they can. They aren't looking to be entertained, and so the illusion of moving them through space only slows them down for no real gain. You can circumvent this to a limited degree with teleportation, but this negates 3D's only real advantage anyway -you might as well be using 2D if you aren't going to be moving through space- so why bother?

Except for Nazis. Punch Nazis.

Incitement to murder, aiding and abeting, and other felonies.

Why is Hitler's ideology so attractive these days to so many people who would have been gassed as defective and degenerate if he had won?

Whine, whine, whine.

Tell you what, how about you grow up and function, and then people might actually want you around. Ever thought of that?

I'd really rather have seen only the Nazi boards and all their inevitable successors and raid-targets go down. It sends a better message to the Nazis: namely, that they really are the only ones that it's acceptable to do this to. They know this, of course, and resent it bitterly, but the big lie that they might not be the only ones is one of their most important tools in finding people and groups to hide behind. Besides, hammering the message home repeatedly hurts them, and Nazis are for punching.

But this will do, if it must. The collateral damage is regrettable, but the message that Nazis ruin things for everybody, which is why no one else ever really wants them around, is also a good one to send.

Just like most of the "bullying" going on in schools is really innocent horseplay, amirite?