The right to interpret a signal passing through your property would fall under Universal Rights. The "right" to claim that the signal cannot be interpreted without permission is a misnomer. It is actual a property arbitration issue and would fall under Social Contract, more specifically under Law. As for God? I'm not sure how that has any bearing on the discussion at all. -Hope

I just opened an account with Citibank. I received the first statement last night. It declares that beginning April 1, they may hold my money for 7 days regardless of how I try to access it. It simply says "withdrawals." There is no reference to account closures. That said, I will be closing this account first thing next week.

I'm referring less to the idea of model citizenry, and more towards the right of people to enter into contracts voluntarily. This includes the right to leave contracts as well. Because it is impossible to foresee every eventuality, contracts have limited scope. When the cost to remain in the contract exceeds the cost of exiting the contract, the contract ends. Apple is saying -- we don't need the business of smokers that badly. That's their right. As to the cost of ending their contract with smokers, I can only suppose they have good-will to lose since it is unlikely that anyone will have legal recourse to challenge them. It would be a class-action lawsuit if someone believes otherwise.

I didn't detect a word of facetiousness here. Smokers have no rights outside of their natural rights to life, liberty, and property. If you smoke and no one wants to be near you, work with you, or enter into a contract with you, then that's morally and ethically sound for both parties. Same goes for parents with obnoxious children, people who cannot keep their pets from defecating in their neighbors yards, etc. Responsible people don't take equipment back to the manufacturer and expect service for items that has been accumulating chemicals from a hazardous environment. Personal responsibility would solve most of this problem.

Have you considered the possibility that after years of perpetual vapor deposition, smoke tar might possibly have a higher chemical concentration then that of a momentary cloud of smoke? As to whether the chemical accumulation in smoke tar is itself hazardous, I have no evidence either way.

I'll take piss over smoke tar any day. Every new parent cleans piss and crap up daily. Ditto for pet owners. Cleaning up smoke tar is like cleaning an oven without the 500 degree heat. PASS.

Actually, fitness has a very specific meaning when discussing evolution: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fitness_(biology) and is similarly applied to genetic algorithms where it's quantified for sorting and culling: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fitness_(genetic_algorithm) In both cases, fitness is context, and therefore environment, specific. -Hope

I'm just saying... if you cannot use your court for justice, perhaps you should not have one at all. Perhaps the gentle folk of East Texas could then reflect on the role of their humble district as it relates to the rest of the country in comparison to their perceived need for a local court system. -Hope

On a similar note, hydrogen peroxide at 50% concentration does the trick nicely. Heats to super-hot steam on contact with the dirt, and bakes the colony from the inside out. I've occasionally seen plumes of steam erupt from other places in the yard. Rarely takes more than one treatment a year and costs less than gasoline if purchased in reasonable quantities. -Hope

I'm not an expert, but my first thought is that the problem lies with "pressurized water/air". Water does not compress well, and even if it did, the water/air mixture would separate leaving a void. By comparison, a rigid foam would solve that, and laminated sheets of foam are probably indistinguishable from thick foam when uniform pressure is applied. So the idea has merit, but possibly with different materials. I'm thinking of rigid cells containing a liquid for neutral buoyancy. -Hope