Lets keep playing deities, it really worked out for us so far...

Right thing to do, for the wrong reasons. If all it takes is republican hatred for democracy to make them change and disable the very protection racket that they created, so much the better.

Your body can produce sufficient glucose on it's own without any added carbohydrates through gluconeogenesis. The human body consider anything more than about 4 grams of free sugar at any one time to be toxic and strive to either burn, excrete or store the excess as fat. There is no need to eat carbohydrates or sugar at all and it is not an essential nutrient.

The real issue here is that North Americans ingest way too much sugar and eat too often without giving the body a chance to actually burn off all that fat.

Jack Chalker also had a great take on a possible smart dust environment in his series https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Lords_of_the_Diamond

Self coding AI...

Shudders. Now it's snippets. Next will be full code. Then it will awaken...

Good old competition, or the lack thereof.

Correction: By laws I mean regulations.

There is nothing preventing local authorities (or organizations) passing more restrictive laws in the aviation world, as long as those laws amplify the nationally established ones.

A spreadsheet is easier to conceptualize, organize and manipulate than a database for most non-IT professionals and users, at the cost of higher risk on the data.

For now. If the current elected bunch had free reign (e.g did not have to face elections) those tea party wannabe would cosy even more to the corporate.

The programmers should introduce the concept of triage.

If the only options is that you can only be partly successful, then chose the one most likely to provide the best results.

His loss, the need will be taken by someone else in this very competitive environment. VR is coming, and playing the ostrich will only limit the bird, not the environment.

Another obstacle removed on Vogon's galactic highway clearing.

Not much time left here...

Fine, better take your last rites then.

What they're essentially saying is that free speech can only be practiced as long as it doesn't offend anyone.

How about saying that free speech can be practised without slander? The problem with some is not the speech, but the content.