Don't forget to change your socks and drink plenty of water for that missing limb! ;]

"Unfortunately Trump is the Command-in-Chief of the United States Armed Forces. If he orders a nuclear strike, there will be a nuclear strike. The United States is NOT a first-strike country as a matter of policy, but that doesn't stop the President from ordering a strike and starting a global shit-fest. The soldiers on the ground *could* refuse to carry-out the order, but those folks would be disobeying a lawful order - I'd have to refer to the UCMJ to see what they would be up against."

It would fall under article 92 (failure to obey a lawful order). However I think an argument could be made, depending on the circumstances, that a nuclear attack order could be viewed as unlawful.

"The Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) 809[890].ART.90 (20), makes it clear that military personnel need to obey the "lawful command of his superior officer," 891.ART.91 (2), the "lawful order of a warrant officer", 892.ART.92 (1) the "lawful general order", 892.ART.92 (2) "lawful order". In each case, military personnel have an obligation and a duty to only obey Lawful orders and indeed have an obligation to disobey Unlawful orders, including orders by the president that do not comply with the UCMJ. The moral and legal obligation is to the U.S. Constitution and not to those who would issue unlawful orders, especially if those orders are in direct violation of the Constitution and the UCMJ. "

"Quite frankly, if the defense is "They don't literally label it news, so anything goes", the argument is weak. It's on a part with "I'm not touching him!", it's childish and not worthy of adult discussion."

No, the defense is the individual has to think for themselves. Your entire argument is "people can't think for themselves so Google and Facebook should", can't get much weaker than that. The fact that you can't refute it and have to resort to childish comparisons proves you should let the adults talk and sit yourself on the sidelines.

"If you (generic) admit it is reasonable to expect news to contain verifiable facts, then any provider proclaiming to give you 'news' should in fact filter for hoaxes. So yes, I maintain that it is Google and Facebook's job to filter the likes of 4chan and Infowars."

Google and Facebook never claim to be a provider of news though, they are simply the middle man. On Google, you can search for news, on Facebook you can follow people or entities that post news stories, but neither claim to provide you with news, just the means of viewing it. They aren't publishing anything, just returning a search which I think is an important distinction. I understand the argument you're making, and I do agree with some of it, but in my opinion the responsibility still rests primary on the individual in this case.

Why is this modded +5?

"One reasonable claim you could make about news is that it contains verifiable facts."

A very reasonable claim yes, but why is it the responsibility of Google or Facebook to verify those facts? If you type in "Las Vegas news" you should just get a list of results that fall under the filter, its up to the reader to critically analyze the results. In this particular case there were few, if any, verified facts regarding the shooting so of course someone with an axe to grind pushed to the top of the results within the first few minutes since they had already made up their mind on what happened, facts be damned, and posted it before any legitimate news had been released.

"What I see here in the discussion is the fallacy of the excluded middle: just because some sources state another version of reality does not mean they are equally important, and should get the same amount of attention."

Again, this is where that pesky critical thinking thing comes into play. No one is claiming fictitious versions of reality are equally important. Personally, I've found that If something smells like shit it usually is. Unfortunately people tend to gravitate towards things that affirm an already settled world view but the realty is you can't control that, you just have to ignore the shit and try to educate yourself and go from there.

"Surely you wouldn't plead for creationists getting top billing in the Science section in searches on the origin of life? I would even think a case could be made they should be put under serious cosmology and evolutionary biology sources in the main page."

This proves the point further, any rational person who was searching for science articles and saw something along the lines of "10 things jesus created out of thin air using vodoo because evolution is a lie created by the devils hand" would dismiss such blatantly false claims and not even click the link.

"Of course the reality is that most of the whining is butt-hurt alt-righters who see their 15 minutes of fame quickly counting down."

Not really sure why this turned into a political issue, never feed the 4chan trolls my friend.

I think outdoor recreational stores will see a decline in the next 10 years. Stores like Dicks sporting goods, Cabelas, and REI (to name a few US examples) already struggle to compete with online retailers, often due to higher markups in brick and mortar establishments for the same or similar equipment. Combine that with an industry that is on the decline (objective opinion based on what I've seen in recent years) and sales will continue to drop. Don't get me wrong, equipment for more "traditional" sports like football and baseball will still be around but for things such as camping/backpacking, canoeing, and mountain biking? I'm not so sure. Additionally, I think there will be a overall decline in publicly accessible land for these kinds of activates. I hope I'm wrong though, whatever happened to spending time outside?

That was a joke which never actually took place. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... & http://www.navy.mil/navydata/q...

The accident took place in the straits of Malacca which is hardly the middle east. If the Captain was so arrogant as to play chicken he could've just sunk the merchant ship when it got to close. Most likely cause was probably weather reducing visibility (heavy fog/mist is quite common in that area) so they didn't see the ship until it was to late.

I cant speak to the birds, but windmills changing the patterns of prevailing winds and altering weather patterns? I'm calling shenanigans on that. Prevailing winds, or a primary wind flow, which drives synoptic scale weather patterns, won't even notice that a windmill is there. An example of a primary wind flow would be the prevailing westerlies (I assume you reside in the northern hemisphere), these are the winds that drive weather via the jet stream (Polar front jet in this case), which sits at or above the 300mb range (roughly 30,000ft). Perhaps you meant to say windmills are influencing local tertiary wind patterns, which is still false: 1) As the name implies tertiary wind flow is trumped by a primary flow. 2) Tertiary patterns are driven mostly by diurnal effects, which again, has nothing to do with windmills. To claim windmills are changing the weather is just spreading ignorance.

This really doesn't seem like that big of a deal. I'm a bike rider, I ride to work everyday and I would much rather ride on a designated bike path separated from the main road as it is much safer for me and drivers. If it costs 15$ when I buy a new bike to be able to do so I'd say that's a pretty fair trade. We're arguing 15$ here, if you buy a decent bike+equipment that's penny's on the dollar, and no I don't think this will hurt local sales much, keep in mind you'll probably spend >15$ shipping a bike if you order it online. I'm no fan of unnecessary taxes but this doesn't seem unreasonable.

As long as its GMO free, grass-fed, and organic I'm in! /s All in all a cool concept though. Thinking globally, perhaps if it becomes more affordable this is something that could be used to combat world hunger in areas of the world where it isn't practical/possible to raise traditional livestock.

Interesting read but I have to admit I'm skeptical. I work in the field and its common knowledge that sensors are few and far between outside of normal travel lanes/coast lines. http://www.ndbc.noaa.gov/ is the site I most often use and its quite lacking all things considered. From TFA (I know, I know) "Since one can never re-observe the ocean in the past, some synthetic data should be used, for instance high-resolution model outputs, sea level data, etc." While these models are decent, they won't perform the best in extremely data sparse areas which can easily skew data when working with over a large area. Not claiming its wrong, just that the lack of live data makes it difficult to honestly assess the situation.

What justice comes from forcing Apple to write this software? The FBI already knows who committed the crime and its quite likely there isn't going to be anything useful on the phone.

Just because you're willing to work for free doesn't mean everyone else can be forced to do so, thats a very dangerous precedent to set.

No, no I wouldn't. There is a reason I don't work for the FBI and everyone already contributes to them solving cases via taxes, do you honestly think the FBI would need your help digging a hole?

Forgive my ignorance on the subject, but how does an iPhone achieve full-encryption using just a four digit pin? I thought the minimum number of characters for full 128-bit encryption was 16? (8 bits of data for each character, 128/8=16)

Actually curious on this because my knowledge of the subject is subpar at best.

With regards to Fender and Gibson, the price difference comes from the domestic versions being built with higher end tone woods (Brazilian rose wood, etc) which makes them a more desirable product for a musician but also increases the price. There is a big difference between a tele or a strat made in Mexico vs one made in California. I'm not sure if the same argument could be said for Apple products though so I do agree with the point you're making, just thought I'd add my two cents on the chosen example. ;[]