$100 the GFW will be able to block it for 99% of the people in 3 years.

Either you're being malicious in the comment or dense. The goal is my robots vs your troops.

Solution is that India will ban WhatApp, and adopt something similar to WeChat..

This is going to lead to the Indian government banning WhatApps, etc and prompting a solution it can control. Such as Tencent's WeChat which is being promoted in India. This is super good for me, I own shares of Tencent.

Where "old" people throw themselves in front of car for insurance payout!

Eg. https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Actually you're wrong. There are "strict liability" crimes in the US in which intent (mens rea) is not required.

In this case you're logic sucks. Lets take apart the statements an assume both are true

1. more than 90 percent of GoFundMe campaigns never meet their goal.
2. For every crowdfunding success story, there are hundreds of failures.

for
1. the statement requires the percentage of campaigns that doesn't meet their goals to be > 90%
2. assume hundreds => 200, then percentage of compaign that doesn't meet their goal to be >= 99.5%

So both can be valid.. just you're logic sucks

Why would you buy an Chromecast Ultra when you can pay the same for the Xiaomi Box? More Features on the Box http://www.mi.com/en/mibox/

That would require the Earth to be very very special indeed, and I just don't see it.

Not at all. For example, I just generated a random number between 1 and 1e9. It was 869,502,332. By your logic, therefore, that number must have been very, very special. But no, it was just really improbable and that number happened to come up.

It may very well be the same case with life. Life could just be extremely improbable, and Earth just happened to be "the number" that was picked. This is what the Anthropic Principle is all about. Our perceptions are colored by the fact that we're here, so we think, "Since the Earth is not special, therefore, other planets must have life like Earth." It might just be that Earth was the lottery winner.

I said this in another post, but I'll say it again: The best evidence against life being common is the fact that it only happened once on Earth. It's fairly conclusive that all life on Earth has a common ancestor. If abiogenesis were easy and common, it wouldn't just stop once it happened one time, it would happen continuously over the billions of years since it happened for us. But it didn't.

And honestly, life on Earth being completely unique in the universe isn't that hard for me to believe when I look at the utterly insane complexity of cellular machinery. But again, extreme improbability doesn't matter when we're deal with the anthropic principle. We don't sense how long it took for intelligent life to pop up, just like we didn't sense the 13 billion years until you and I were born to think about all this.

likely

We have zero evidence for life being likely, except wishful thinking in the form hand-waving like the utterly useless Drake equation. On the other hand, we do have some suggestive evidence that life itself is improbable. The biggest evidence is that, as near as we can determine, it only happened once on Earth. If life was probable, it should have continued to re-occur, but we're fairly certain that all life has a common ancestor.

I think you mean "wrong" rather than "dangerous". There is a limited impact to our having a wrong opinion on the matter.

This will help you out

Dumbass, improbable does not imply magical. That's the other problem with life being really improbable, a lot of science people get all uptight that the religionists are going to run around gleefully saying "HA!!! THE SCIENTISTS ADMIT GOD IS THE ONLY EXPLANATION!!!"

More like, "it's how it was in the beginning. We all know at this point it's a dumb idea and a huge mistake, and Reddit has proven that editing can work and work well, but we're too set in our ways to admit it's a mistake and thus we'll call it 'working as intended' and pretend that it serves a purpose." See also: Deleting accounts.

Dammit. Reddit has spoiled me on submitting without having to make absolutely sure I didn't make any formatting mistakes and editing later. I wish Slashdot would come into the 21st century.

> I think life at the single cell level might be fairly common. I actually think the single cell is the hard part. People underestimate just how INSANELY complex single cell organisms are. I don't mean a little complex, I mean crazy complex. Look at this animation of DNA replication: https://www.youtube.com/watch?... One side is duplicated straightforwardly... the other side has to be taken apart, flipped around and reassembled... and this is only one example. It gets even crazier from there. We tend to think of cells as "simple life forms", but they mind-blowingly complicated machines. It would not shock me at all if there was no other example of single cells in the entire universe.