Name 3

Can we reduce harm to zero? Possibly.
Is it desirable to do so? Not remotely.

Banning people whoâ(TM)ve stood near a smoker from entering a public place is a great way of getting no customers.

Smoking, like drinking, or driving, or running, or eating, or anything has both costs and benefits. At some point we almost certainly mitigated the costs through taxation and regulations. Further restrictions are cost without benefit.

You donâ(TM)t live on that salary though, you exploit economies of scale either by getting roommates or a partner.

I really wouldnâ(TM)t expect minimum wage to provide for a comfortable life, itâ(TM)s literally the minimum acceptable wage.

I know, I live there. We're on XP using a buggy terminal emulator from the nineties to access some systems, and internet explorer 7 for others. It's just sad that nobody has been willing to put any effort in to these systems since the millennium.

Hah, nice.

When I went there we spelled it correctly. Surprisingly the fault of the article rather than /. editors.

I don't buy that anyone is stuck with old custom software. If you had it made before, you can do it again, it's just an excellent excuse for refusal to replace PCs and get some unpaid overtime from people whose PC takes half an hour to boot up, but you don't start paying them until they signed in.

Wikipedia is a group endeavour, people on the left are more likely to seek community solutions, people on the right are more likely to work alone.

Once you've largely written your encyclopaedia, there's nothing for talented individuals to do, they don't want to spend all day arguing over conjunctions and which picture is best, so the only people left are the ones with bizarre ideas about consensus.

All victims deserve to be believed.

Except you, because you said something nasty about a Clinton.

I never saw how this differed from the Michelson-Morley experiment, and could equally show the existence of luminiferous ether.

They're not all white Catholics, you know.

They might want to pardon those still living with criminal records for this.

There are rather a few.

How is freely helping one another not libertarian?
It's only socialism if you're forced in to "helping" one another with threats of violence.

Wouldn't that be the Koran?

Except we can't analyse a book in the same way we analyse a boson, or a molecule in the way we analyse a song.

Differences between even Chemistry and Physics are so great that if you want to go back to the old terms, literary analysis is science, it uses peer reviewed evidence based thinking, just like all of our fields of study.