Cole Thomas Allen graduated from Caltech, so there's that.

If anger is the only way you can get energy, it's better than the alternative of not having energy. There are better forms of energy.

If you aren't able to channel your anger into fixing the problem, then the anger is wasted energy.

Hate only hurts you, not them.

If you take action, the action can hurt them. But the hate itself only hurts you.

Welcome to democracy.

When I see this I think, "Who at Caltech made Trump mad?" He has a tendency to try to get revenge for petty reasons.

We don't need a gatekeeper, we need a curator.

If the script were better, it would be watchable.

The movie looks ok. I watch cartoons from time to time so I don't mind that.

The script is awful though.

On the upside, AI lets anyone make a movie.
On the downside, AI lets anyone make a movie.

Including people who have terrible taste in plot, style, and everything else.

There's some genuinely good stuff out there - Gossip Goblin's work for example. But this is....

I'll just say, there's far better things that one could have spent half a million dollars on...

But the phone book did not list one's political affiliation.

Maltodextrin is easy to buy online and I imagine you could get it in stores that sell supplements for athletes (it's a common quick-energy booster, being a very rapidly-absorbed carbohydrate). The emulsifier and color you don't really need, though I suspect you could find them pretty easily if you wanted. The emulsifier is mostly to increase shelf life, and the color is for color.

A longer period of time with those you love, engaging in the activities you find fulfilling,

Drinking and eating steak are two of the most pleasurable and fulfilling activity's I can think of right off to bat....P So, I'll take the steak and alcohol....and it's fun to cook and consume these with those I love....

How are you defining "statistical inferences" as distinct from "logical inferences"? If you're defining fuzzy logic (e.g. not necessarily yes-or-no answers but allowing for ambiguity in conclusions), then we can agree conceptually, but your choice of wording is, I have to say, weird if so.

The mechanism of action is a chain of causation. For example, the acetaldehyde in cigarette smoke damages DNA. When a certain gene is damaged, it becomes an oncogene which leads to cancer.

A correlation is not a causation. That's math.

FYI Oxford is in England. The report authors are titled "Sir."