This is Virginia. We don't think here.

It doesn't take a conspiracy to try to convince yourself that nothing's wrong. All it takes is an uncomfortable fact that you don't want to acknowledge, and that's enough for most people to try to pretend it's not true.

And a couple hundred criminals not affiliated with the government. You're just killing the competition for the next batch!

I'm having an issue with the math in that link. It says eating while driving is a bigger risk, and increases the odds of crashing by 80% - or, in decimal terms, 1.8 times as likely. Yet it also says in the linked article about texting while driving, and I quote, "You are 23 times more likely to have an accident while texting and driving. That's not a typo, 23 times more likely to crash!"

Now, I didn't go to college, or take any math past Algebra in high school, but I'm pretty sure 23 > 1.8.

How many drivers are constantly fiddling with the radio? I don't ride with a lot of people, nor do I drive myself (much prefer walking), but every person I've been in the car with sets the radio at the beginning of the trip and leaves it alone, occasionaly adjusting at a stop light.

Statistically-speaking, though, my sample size would be deemed hilariously inadequate, so I may missing something.

Of the businesses being forced to change their practices due to (any) new regulations, how many of them are poor and struggling, and how many of them are a half-step removed from being a monopoly?

Well, you don't really need to shove gravity. It tends to go down pretty well on its own.

Having your patients die or sue you for malpractice would go a long way toward hindering the pursuit of money.

With that in mind, what relevance does the motivation have? Either they treat you because they think it's right, or they treat you because they want to preserve their income. Neither of which, incidentally, has any real ties to their religious beliefs or lack thereof.

I've yet to see a "first post" that actually was.

But the assumption that people will do something about it shouldn't be made for a "worst case" scenario. I'm a little more okay with it being a matter of missing data, but to use the phrase "worst case scenario" implies that you're throwing out any remaining naivete and, you know, expecting the worst. To do otherwise is both misleading and incompetent.

Is it weird that I want phrases to consistently mean something?

I just hope they consider that there are some people, such as myself, that get no actual use out of 3D. In my case, it's because of a blind eye.

1. I was just setting up a lame pun.

2. Competition not between companies, but rather China (or at least the people in charge of this project) trying to show up the rest of the world by getting it done faster.

The track record exists, but competition often derails such petty concerns as safety.

That's because they're new enough to get old men and lazy parents riled up.

Really? That is what you're going with? Now, I don't care about the measurements one way or the other, and I'll never understand why people get so worked up about it, but there are many things wrong with the US school system. Measurements have absolutely nothing to do with it, and frankly that has got to be the shittiest argument on any topic I've ever heard. Kudos, sir or ma'am; I work in retail and have for several years, so that's really quite an accomplishment.