If they're not toxic, use them as artificial reefs.

Apple blocked the app because China told them to block it. Now that the Chinese government has the infrastructure in place to track who is using it, they told Apple to turn it back on so that they can catch all of the phones re-establishing contact. Apple stands for nothing but money.

We all know that China was not alone when word got out of what took place. Can anyone seriously doubt that under deep, deep secrecy, amorality wins the day? The China babies should be murdered if they can reproduce, to be frank about it. They have the ability to alter humanity, as do all similar projects. China was a public wake-up call for what surely was a well-known and tempting possibility in scientific and military circles. A nation with super-babies will eventually dominate the world through their prowess in whatever attributes have been enhanced. Are they able to tolerate the impacts of global warming better than other populations? In that case, they will survive as others die off. Disease resistance and other enhanced attributes with physical impact will yield the same result:local, regional, national and then international dominance. What nation wants to let that fate befall it? Believe me, every nation with a brain is pondering this problem. The same pattern will apply for intellectual enhancements, if that turns out to be possible. But the big "gotcha" is the possibility of breeding in a fatal mistake. Playing God isn't always as simple as science might make it appear and very likely there will come an "oh-oh" day after humanity is well down this path and the possibility of a huge dead end looms. On the other hand, if they make these babies so that they cannot reproduce, then we will have a class of ultimate slaves, bred as in Brave New World (how did Huxley know all this stuff?) for specific tasks and a very limited outcome. We won't have to try to perfect AI in silicon when it is already perfected in gray matter. It will be interesting to see how world powers will take the forbidden fruit of genetically produced slavery. Will there be a constitutional amendment to declare that indeed not all people are created equal any more? Imagine living in a world like that where several humans you encounter daily have been bred for a specific future, by law sterile, by law not allowed to associate with other classes, etc. That's where I see this going ultimately after the genetic soldiers duke it out to see which country runs the world. Happy Wednesday and tell the grand kids what's coming! Actually, there's a more logical twist, Governments will regulate and use this technology for specific projects such as soldiers, of course, super-spies and super evil genius Republican politicians. But of course, the uber-wealthy will do this illegally on the sly so that their children will come to dominate society. Basically, no matter how you look at it, this is going to lead to really bad outcomes.

That article in the NYTimes was a real cheap shot. Blaming pilots for failing to survive Boeing's murder machine is beyond low class. And that the Times falls for that, well, no surprise. The fact of the matter is that excellent pilots were confronted by a secret riddle that had no business being on the plane in the first place. But watch closely. Behind the scenes Boeing and their Republican pals are preparing the groundwork to make it so that no airline has to tell you what type of equipment you are flying on when you book and they will also make sure that if they switch equipment on you to a refurbished MAX, you will have no choice but to fly or lose your money. Hooray for capitalism and crooked politicians.

This guy's problem seems to be that he sees the world entirely through the logical eyes of a computer scientist. It's either a 1 or a 0, nothing in between. That is probably why he made the absurd statement about age and location. He seems to be one of those people who thinks if you are not physically coerced, then you have done something of your own free will. Any fully-formed adult recognizes you can talk someone into doing something you really know (or strongly suspect) they don't want to do and never would have suggested it on their own. I don't think the victim here ran up to the perp and said "Hi! I'm 17! Wanna have sex with me?" As for age of consent, men and women have for centuries talked adults into doing things they may later regret and wish they hadn't agreed to do. But what makes that legal is the age of consent and the absence of physical force. Many of us, the more decent among us, have recognized in adults when consent should be dismissed and whatever objective not pursued further. Intoxicated people who you don't know or the over 18 person who seems like maybe they're not quite dealing with a full deck come to mind. Even if the victim had been 18, you still can get the sense of when something is not right and should act accordingly.

Part of this is teaching a child about maturity and decision-making and the consequences of decisions. If your child hasn't learned how to cope with boundaries at home, then said child will earn the experience of rule-breaking. Helicopter parenting deprives children of valuable lessons in real-life consequences. There is nothing at all wrong with this form of discipline.