Slashdot Mirror

Getting elected was the plan backfiring on him.

Yes and no. He did not expect to get elected, but that did not stop him from doing everything he could to get elected because he absolutely wanted to win the election. He just didn't want to do the work of presidenting. But now that he is president he's going to milk it for everything he possibly can.

If only he would pull a Palin - declare victory and resign. But that will never happen because of all the criminal shit he did to win the election. He's trapped in the job. Stepping down wont make the investigations go away. His only hope is to abuse the power of the office to try to derail the investigations.

Ironically, his situation is a lot like Putin. Putin's pulled so much criminal shit that if he ever loses power he's going to end up executed like Ceausescu or worse. In fact, its been reported that he obsesses over the video of Gadhafi being lynched. Like Putin, Trump's only hope of survival is to grasp the reigns of power as tightly as he possibly can. The left will not stand for a pardon ala nixon, they will demand jail time for him and the rest of his co-conspirators, including Ivanka. Which means extracting trump from the whitehouse is going to get super ugly, he will take the entire country down with him.

Social Security is busted already. Anyone under the age of 50 who's counting on it needs to wake up - because at best you'll get 75% of what a retiree gets now. The average today is about $1400, meaning you'll get around $1000 per month. If you think living on $4K a month is hard - try 1/4 of that, with higher drug and medical costs to boot (half are covered by their employers today).

Amazon has profited from the infrastructure that the Seattle taxpayers have provided for them over the years, including an education system that has provided the workers that have been the engine that has driven Amazon's wealth.

Your veracity and reasoning are suspect.

I myself experienced Western Washington's education system after attending public schools in another part of the country, and I can tell you that Washington's education is sub-par. The value provided by Seattle's infrastructure is not at all what you suggest.

This is the kind of selfish short-term thinking that will destroy this country.

Maybe. But you're overlooking the critical fact that Washington State government is responsible for making the homeless problem significantly worse with the Deinstitutionalization policies it implemented during the 1990's. Deinstitutionalization is the name given to the policy of moving severely mentally ill people out of large state institutions and then closing part or all of those institutions.

In particular,

• • The most compelling, wildly naïve economic case went something like this: We have a state mental hospital with a $100 million annual budget that houses 1,000 patients. Many of these patients don't need to be there. If we moved them into community settings, we free up the $100,000 average per-patient costs of this facility, which we can redirect to community mental health centers, housing assistance, and other services to help them.

    As Christopher Jencks noted in his elegant little volume "The Homeless," this argument is misguided in almost every way. Of course, state mental hospitals and other institutions included many patients who required few inpatient services. Yet the patients who spent their days playing cards didn’t draw upon many services beyond room, board, and medication, which they would still require (often at higher unit costs) in any other setting. Deinstitutionalizing low-cost patients doesn’t appreciably reduce the hospital’s $100 million budget. It wouldn’t reduce fixed costs of operating the facility. It doesn’t allow managers to lay off staff who spend much of their time working with the smaller subgroup of most-needy or most-disruptive patients.

Source: What happened to U.S. mental health care after deinstitutionalization?

In my opinion, Amazon can be reasonably forgiven for seeking to protect its fiduciary responsibilities in the face of a government who created the very problem that this tax is intended to resolve.

Cheers.

Show me who is against branks disclosing rates and fees.

OK, that's easy.

http://money.cnn.com/2017/11/2...

Show me who is for hospitals doing the same.

Did you read the fucking article?

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/n...

Show the overlap.

The Republican Party is the party of Trump. That's the overlap.

Questions?

But instead of relying on science, our political system lets companies write the laws and regulations that govern them. As a result, we get abominations like polluted water in Flint MI, West Virginia, and North Carolina.

Before releasing something into the water supply, samples should be tested for contaminants. And if those samples don't make the grade, those responsible need to be held accountable. Making discharge safe typically involves diluting it to approved contaminant levels before releasing it into the water supply. Simple, really. There are labs that can and do test discharge samples for a plethora of contaminants, acidity, color, dissolved oxygen, turbidity, etc. But they don't test for everything that might be dangerous - prescription drugs for example. These sort of things need to be put right before they are put in our water. But it won't happen if science doesn't make the rules and regulators don't enforce those rules.

Because science and technology can verifiably be used to clean up the environment, whereas politics demonstratively won't, I propose replacing Scott Pruitt with AI. If AI is good enough for the CIA, it's gotta be better for the environment than a corrupt political lackey.

--

http://www.pbs.org/independentlens/videos/what-lies-upstream/

Christians, among other people, although in this country when they want to commit suicide they're more apt to use guns and the police as their instruments. I suspect that's because guns are easy to get here. If you have to build your own instrument of mass murder, improvised explosives are the way to go.

Watch Nova's Decoding the Weather Machine. The science is settled. Global temperatures are rising. Sea levels are rising. Severe weather is getting worse.

The only uncertainty is whether we Americans will get off our collective ass and help fix the problem we helped to create.

http://www.pbs.org/video/decod...

They mentioned since the 1970s, half the coral over the whole planet has been destroyed. Fucking not cool. One possible hope is that this lady with her team in Hawaii are trying to "speed up evolution" and introduce hardy coral types all over the world. 25% of sea life is around coral reefs... if we lose all of them I'm pretty sure it's going to cause a lot of problems.

I'll say that 15 years ago I was skeptical about the global warming thing. Then as more and more scientists became more sure, I realized there was absolutely something to it. This episode of Nova shows you tons and tons of evidence of why the majority of scientists seem to have no doubt. The worst thing is that we are now at atmospheric CO2 concentrations that are about double what the highest has ever been in the last 800,000 years as measured by air trapped in 2 mile deep ice in the arctic (or was it antarctic?). CO2 going up so violently quickly and heating going up so violently quickly is the real problem... we don't have a 10,000 years to adapt, we have a decade. Anything without a quick reproduction cycle is going to struggle in some areas. Don't worry, insects don't have this problem so you can bet no matter what we do there will be bugs left to eat our rotting corpses.

They say it has been estimated how much extra carbon we have put in the atmosphere from fossil fuels, and of that about 25% is absorbed by the ocean and another 25% is absorbed by trees on land. The other 50% is good old greenhouse gassing it up. The majority of the heat is absorbed by oceans too, which for now is keeping the atmosphere from changing as rapidly. Only problem is they predict by the year 2100 we'll have anywhere from 1 to 8 feet of higher ocean levels, which will screw up a lot of places along the coasts.

The only good news I got from this show was that wind and solar is cheaper than what anybody thought possible at this point in time, and usually cheaper than creating new coal operations. So at least the greedy types won't have more excuses to screw us over even more.

You mean the money for military bases,

Deeply loved by Red States. Sacred even. Some of us remember BRAC.

Indian reservations,

Created by the insistence of Red Staters who wanted to take the lands of the various tribes, then neglect them. See the Trail of Tears, or even the Shinnecock Hills Golf Club.

bloated government healthcare,

What, you mean the VA system> that you want to privatize to enrich yourself like with Medicare?

and inefficient educational systems?

You mean the public schools run by the local school boards?

We heard that song close to 40 years ago. There's no national institution to blame, there's no Federal Commission setting standards or operating schools outside of the BIA, DOD, and State Department. Even DC schools are run by the local government.

I'd say they thrive.

So you're saying they're doing poorly now. Interesting admission. How do they groan under the boot of the same Federal government they ostensibly control by the cheering crowds of the people?

Receiving federal funds isn't a benefit, it's a liabilitiy.

That explains why they pant so handily after the money they can extract from the states that actually try to take care of their people.

Source: http://www.pbs.org/video/putin...

Who pays for the year over year losses totaling in the tens of billions?

https://www.thoughtco.com/post...

Someone is paying for those losses.

https://about.usps.com/news/na...

When businesses operate at losses such as these, they go out of business (ToyRUs)

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/n...

They get a search warrant. Their system shows that there's a few million test tubes storing DNA samples. That's more than the budget for all the police departments in the US.

The issue addressed wasn't how expensive it is to properly analyze DNA, but whether companies like 23andMe and Ancestry will turn over your DNA to the government. Yes, they will and have.

They obtain the SNP values... They use an archaeology DNA lab to sequence the crime scene sample because improper storage means it has broken down.... DNA lasts upwards of a million years and there's a lot of cross-contamination... They're not methodical, they use DNA to try and rig conviction rates...

Archaeology, archaeogenetics, what do I know? I'm not going to put forensics on trial. PBS's Nova already did that: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/tech/forensics-on-trial.html

Your average American would prefer fake trials to paying for a decent service.

'Criminal Justice' is a double entendre. For some reason, this brings to mind the Nietzschean allegory about a murder. The sheriff discovered the blacksmith did it. The village had only one blacksmith, though, so they convicted one of the bakers instead.

You just completely ignored the GP's point that "we're" stuck on old nuclear and wouldn't use that technology today but describing all the problems with old nuclear.

Try here:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/...

The CEO of Sears/KMart is an Ayn Rand follower. That's what killed it.

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/e...

How and why are well known. The politicians (Gore/Kerry/O'Leary) shut down the program.

https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages...

Data disagrees with your assessment. For example, according to this poll http://cdn.cnn.com/cnn/2018/images/02/26/rel3c.-.russia.pdf approximately 58% of Americans don't think that the administration is taking Russian interference seriously enough. And a large fraction of Americans support the Mueller investigation to completion although curiously about 40% of Americans don't even know who he is https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/poll-most-americans-want-robert-mueller-to-complete-his-russia-probe. It is a mistake to think that because you and the people around you think something that that view must be universal.

You mean Daniel Boone?

I'm not that old. The Woodwright's Shop. http://www.pbs.org/woodwrightsshop/home/

BTW, MOD DOWN creimer's sockpocket!!!!

I'm the AC who is marking your comments with "Creimertard. Mod down." Now fuck off.

Has some of the history of the atomic age and the science, math.
http://www.pbs.org/program/ura...

The evidence of Trump water collusion is nearly indisputable.

More generally, there seems to be a lot of solid evidence of Trump-God collusion. Apparently it is even more apparent than the Trump-Putin collusion. I hear Mueller is close to impeaching Trump for it.

Roman Mir?

Some citations: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
http://www.pbs.org/wnet/africa...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...


Not only were beating, lynching, and rape common and likely in Jim Crowe areas, they were likely in the North as well. Racism is not only a southern problem. Have you ever heard of a "sunset" town? They existed in many states.
Do you honestly think none of this was backed up by violence or threats of violence? We live an a remarkably peaceful time and it's difficult for many people to reconcile that with past attitudes and practices.
In a perfect world, you could research this all yourself, but once again I'm wasting my time trying to educate an ignoramus. Yes, I know this is an unlikely way to change your mind, but I'm pretty sure your not fixable.

> RACE ONLY MATTERS AS MUCH AS YOU LET IT MATTER.

Jim Crow
Jim Crow 2.0
Red-lining
Red-lining 2.0
Sundown Towns
Tuskegee Experiment
School Segregation
School Segregation 2.0
The War on Drugs specifically targeted blacks
Driving While Black
Walking While Black
Debtor's Prison 2.0

I certainly trust veterans with firearms much more than I do police in the USA. At least veterans have proper respect beaten into us.

You can't beat respect into someone. You can beat rifle skills into them, but not respect. You can beat violence into them, but not respect. You can beat a dark future for humanity into them, but not respect.

It's a fact that the military has had to dig deeper and deeper into the barrel as people have become more and more aware that our military exists to project power and maintain our empire, and not to make the world a better place. That's why racism is a massive problem in the military which is trickling down to law enforcement. Military may receive better training, but that's not a good thing when they're someone who never should have had military training in the first place. They will be inclined to use the deadly parts of their military training right along with the parts you like. And if they joined up in the first place because they're a bully who wanted to push people around, they're just going to do more of that as a cop.

The idea that soldiers are more responsible than the average member of the population is beyond ridiculous. There are many reasons why people might join up, and the military cannot afford to reject those who do not meet their standards, because they would otherwise be even shorter on recruits than they think they are already.

It is indeed very hard to accurately estimate the numbers. In case you're interested, here's some more background about the issue (including the fact that until December 2000, there wasn't even a generally accepted definition of "trafficking"), and numbers from various (US and other) institutions.

No, your own story is inaccurate.

What the CDC director actually said was "There are NO banned words at CDC." emphasis mine

That statement was reported by sources across the media spectrum, from Left to Right. So why did you get it wrong?

The solution being offered, "single payer" isn't really a solution, and will end up putting us on the road to Venezuela and Greece.

But the sad part is we are already on our way there without single payer healthcare. And all the while spending as much public money on healthcare as many other countries already do. Our debt to GDP ratio is already horrible. Throw in a Trumpian tax cut, some infrastructure spending, a wall, and a great military, and we have only one direction to go.

Well, I just can't understand how most of Europe and Canada do it without actually going bankrupt.

Services cost less. See charts here https://www.pbs.org/newshour/h...

If the US can fix the system of incentives that inflate prices, then single-payer can be much more affordable.

>Actually the republicans donate more money then democrats do, often to help the poor and charities.

really where are the numbers ? And relatively more or absolutely more ?

Better yet, what's the effectiveness of their charitable spending.? And what's the spending really on?

Because you know, those Conservatives often have their charities being less than perfect.

Not to mention that Hobby Lobby business. Which the usual suspects defended.

Well no, he gets this exactly backwards. Network Neutrality was EXACTLY such a reversal, and here's Pai simply undoing what the FCC wasn't free to do in the first place. Pai is correcting the very transgression Wu is citing here.

If there is any disagreement as to whether the FCC has that authority it is the responsibility of the judiciary and/or congress to clarify the matter. I disagree that the FCC doesn't/shouldn't have the authority to enforce net neutrality but if there is disagreement on that point then the courts are a perfectly reasonable place to address the matter. To be frank with the current Congress and administration the judiciary is probably the only place to fight what Mr Pai is trying to do.

It was previously a longstanding rule--supported by law--that the FCC would have a hands off approach to the internet.

A hands off approach isn't an option. You either support the content makers or your support the ISPs and there are consequences either way. Elimination of net neutrality rules de-facto is favoring the interests of certain parties over others. There is no middle ground here and someone has to play referee. If not the FCC then someone else but I would argue that net neutrality is a vital policy that needs to be enforced. I think Ajit Pai's arguments against net neutrality are specious at best and corrupt at worst.

Pai is saying the FCC can't make such reversals.

Why not listen to what he actually said? Pai is CLEARLY in the pocket of those who favor elimination of net neutrality and has a long track record of favoring the interests of broadcasters over other parties. This is neither new nor a secret. His arguments are ridiculous and specious and transparently one sided.

Show me where a high fat diet is bad.

Eat fat, live longer?

People Who Follow Low-Fat Diets Have Higher Mortality Rates, Study Says

Ajit Pai (and his GOP-appointed counterpart) had their minds made up years ago, and his doggedly stubborn position feels like it's based in ideology instead of the facts presented by his opponents.

Just compare this PBS.org interview where Mr. Pai used the same selective dodging of the facts pointed out by NN advocates (especially John Oliver's piece on the subject back in the day) that don't support his point of view. Then watch John Oliver's simplistic but factually correct episodes from 2014 and 2017 - Part One and 2017 - Part Two on the issue.

Either John Oliver (and his writing/research staff) or Ajit Pai is an outright liar about this issue. Any bets on who's the fibber? It's either a left-leaning comedian, or a former Verizon Wireless lawyer. (TIP: Don't bet the farm on this being a bad John Oliver joke...)

DNS-and-BIND blathered:

Phonics was discredited decades ago as boring and dull for children. They weren't learning, especially most disadvantaged children in our inner cities. We needed an approach that they could excel at.

Oh, really? Perhaps you should tell that to the National Institute of Health, because their 2000 article on the report of the Congressionally-mandated, independent National Reading Panel concludes exactly the opposite. Or, if you require training wheels, you'll have an easier time of it with PBS's summary of the panel's major findings.

But, since you have such a well-documented contempt for all things USA, you might be more comfortable referring to the Australian state of New South Wales Department of Education and Training's Literacy Teaching Guide: Phonics, instead. Or, given your general dismissal of governments as oppressors, it's possible that a private corporation that has spent decades focusing on primary-level educational materials like Scholastic.com's Parent & Child Magazine could seem more credible to you.

Or, alternatively, you could just read the Wikipedia page on phonics, which not only explains what phonics is and how it works, but goes into the history and controversy of phonics, especially phonics vs. whole language, not only in the USA, but in Australia, Great Britain, and Canada, as well.

There're plenty of other resources available to support the view that phonics (and its sister technique phonemics - you really need to use them in combination with each other for best results), in conjunction with primer material that is actually interesting, is the most effective strategy for teaching new readers.

And I'm sure you don't care, but my own, anecdotal experience is all the evidence I require. You see, when I was expelled from first grade for being disruptive (due to not having been diagnosed as being nearsighted to the point that I was legally blind), my mother undertook to teach me to read at home. In less than a month, I went from not even knowing the alphabet to reading at an eighth-grade level. Much of that was due to her using the phonics+phonemics approach, a roughly equal part can be credited to her choice of Dr. Suess, rather than the achingly-dull Dick and Jane books, as my primer. (When we exhausted his catalogue, she introduced me to the Reader's Digest, instead.) Within 30 days, from a standing start, I had read my first Tom Swift, Jr. novel, and embarked on a lifelong love affair with reading - especially science fiction, but also history, biographies, science and technology, and, as Robert A. Heinlein put it, "words in a line" in general.

So, please, by all means, pray continue to explain how phonics has been "discredited" for decades. You ignorance of the subject is simply fascinating.

Wait, what's the antonym for "fascinating" ... ?

Only if you are lazy or stupid and don't care about the implications when deciding acceptable error levels. Much less than 0.18% is a problem when it concerns life and death decisions, like government. Much less of one type of Tylenol was contaminated with cyanide and it killed

1. Declare the sky is falling due to (something you can blame on humans)
2. Get someone to fund your long-range study.
3. ....
4. Profit! (Or at least have permanent employment and probably tenure.)

Unfortunately, most of them have already been picked:
http://dailysignal.com/2009/11...

Although there is a strong second-order field opening up, like "how the ocean ate my global warming expectations" or better, "attribution science" where your entire existence is about proving how weather = climate, as long as it's bad, of course.
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/t...

(braces self for predictable -infinity, Troll moderation)

You're avoiding the reality that the unions were a short term cudgel until progressive-era laws were put into place to prevent the abuses you refer to. Once political power was in the hands of a Teddy Roosevelt, let's say, or his nephew, things changed rapidly.

Riiiiight. Companies that exploits workers limb from literal limb are a thing of the past, like racism, sexism, and forest fires.

But even if there weren't happy to let your dumb bootlicking ass die in a fire to save a few bucks, unions are also a necessary pushback against corporate greed. Like when companies in the midst of all-time-high profits lay off thousands of workers or demand they take pay cuts so the stockholders can make even more obscene amounts of money.

No what it means is Clinton was so unlikable, Retard America wanted a "retard" over her and due to an archaic voting system they got their way despite Non-retard America voting for Clinton.

That is a very important distinction http://www.pbs.org/newshour/ru...

Ha, so that 'miracle' played itself out quite a bit when the Pilgrims tried building their Communism and then almost died from hunger because that's what Communism (any collectivism actually) does, it removes personal responsibility together with personal ownership and then everybody suffers.

You seem to be confusing inexperience with the mechanisms of survival in an unfamiliar place with the methodology of organization.

Most likely, a deliberate choice, meant to advance your ideological cause under a cloak of altered reality.

It wasn't until the people become selfish that USA succeeded.

What are you talking about? Plenty of selfish people existed in the USA, they didn't miraculously find success. Many of them tried and failed, without the benefit of anyone like say, Squanto.

You can read lots of articles about the subject.

Of course, you won't, but that's hardly surprising.

Ha, so that 'miracle' played itself out quite a bit when the Pilgrims tried building their Communism and then almost died from hunger because that's what Communism (any collectivism actually) does, it removes personal responsibility together with personal ownership and then everybody suffers. It wasn't until the people become selfish that USA succeeded.

some articles on the matter.

As opposed to my-birth-certificate is none of your business or my-college-records are none of your business but I'm a Rhodes scholar and professor of constitutional law but get my EOs overturned at a record breaking level Obama?

By any number of metrics, the Obama administration was the least transparent administration in history, bar none. Just because you happened to agree with him doesn't change that fact. Obama had the largest number of lobbyists working in the white house in the last 50 years. The Obama administration lied to judges so they could spy on journalists and the AP to find white house leaks they didn't like. There is a list 3 feet long of incidence where the Obama admin concealed information from the public for political advantage.

https://www.washingtonpost.com...
http://reason.com/archives/201...
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/ru...
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/o...

They're trying to reduce everything to statistics and numbers, like Robert McNamara did in Vietnam.

It's trying to make sense of something they don't really understand - the human element. The chaos. Motivation. Leadership. Ability.

"If you can't measure what's important, what you can measure becomes important."

Funny thing, there's a documentary on this which just aired on Frontline. There was one bank which was prosecuted for the subprime mortgage crisis, just one. A tiny one based in Chinatown in New York.

The premise of Friday's show looked good but it lacked any substance. It was just celebrities.

PBS NOVA had a great episode a year ago called School of the Future that gave a lot studies behind each of the proposed ideas.

Link on PBS to back up everything I say about this... http://www.pbs.org/opb/history...

Now mod me 5 insightful please, the original reply to my post which is completely incorrect was modded 4 insightful - friggin' /.

They didn't mention stylometry because it wasn't invented yet, they were actively inventing it at the moment.

http://www.pbs.org/opb/history...

Shoot I wish my posts would be modded up insightful as they deserve, see my previous post where a guy was modded insightful for the incorrect reply...

Redneck killed one person.

Muslim terrorists mostly kill or hurt their Muslims, and attacks on US soil are vanishingly rare.

Right-wing violent attacks in the US number almost one a day. They're not reported widely because they're normal.

"Simple FOIA Request?" There's no such thing.

I've worked with a few Federal agencies and watched how much time is spent on FOIA requests. It takes a lot of effort to get some of the data together and along with the approval process, i.e., "Will this compromise any ongoing operations? Does it need redaction based on PII and other rules? Where is the data?" Then there's the approval of the response which always has to be reviewed by Lawyers, discussed in triplicate and then dispatched to the requester. Some agencies have huge departments just dedicated to handling FOIA requests and even with that I've seen them impact day to day operations where front line management has to deal with data collection and validation as well.

To a point, FOIA is a great law and I think it's definitely opened up the inner workings of gov't. A lot of this would go away if the gov't was more transparent to begin with especially in matters not dealing in PII/4th amendment issues (Tax Returns for individuals) or national security. I do think some FOIA requests are fishing expeditions and in all cases the costs should be paid for by the requester. It's also not applied uniformly across all agencies and while the National Park Service may respond quickly, the DoD or DOJ may take years or in the case of the IRS or State Department might get derailed altogether.

How is this something that Clinton didn't do, with the Clinton foundation?

The Clinton foundation is for charity, it is not an election campaign fund. Paying any election-related activities, or anything at all that benefits the Clintons, from the funds of the Clinton foundation would be illegal, and would get the foundation into trouble with the IRS.

This is not theoretical, Donald Trump's charity did get into trouble with the IRS for this exact violation: see http://www.pbs.org/newshour/ru...

getting them there is going to take a lot of time and money.

Traffic accidents cost $870 BILLION per year in America alone, so this is certainly something worth spending a lot of time and money on.

One of the great thing about our country is that they are allowed to voice their opinion

Yeah, tell that to Trump supporters in Portland. These days, being a Republican in a blue state can cost your your job, your friends, your property, your personal safety, even your life if you're not careful. It's part of what has driven me and many others away from the modern left.

How about you stop being as stupid as an anti-vaxxer, and be a bit more scientific and open-minded. I am not saying vaccines are bad. Just that, well maybe we need to look at new formulations of our vaccines for greater efficacy.

http://www.thv11.com/news/loca...

http://www.sciencedirect.com/s...

https://www.scientificamerican...

https://www.sciencedaily.com/r...

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/up...
"Among the 51 measles cases linked directly to Disneyland, six of the people had received their measles, mumps and rubella vaccine, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention" (honestly, since schools mandate this, do you really think less than 12% of people were vaccinated? Or is it more likely they simply couldn't provide proof of vaccination. Can you? Can you provide proof of your own vaccination or your children's? Most folks cannot.

The GMO crap they produce now is crap, built in pesticides to kill pests and harm people

The only built in pesticide is Bt, which is a protein that was discovered a hundred years ago and is only known to be toxic to invertebrates. All farmers (including organic) use Bt liberally, and you eat it all the time.

herbicide resistant to pass tolerance to closely related species

Actually there's already a solution to that:

https://geneticliteracyproject...

It's also worth noting that the process of using herbicides greatly reduces the amount of water needed, in addition to reducing the landmass and increasing crop yields.

long life with poor digestibility, basically all the crap ideas

Where the fuck did you get this from? There isn't any evidence that they aren't digestible. People like you with your constant spewing of lies are why we can't have nice things:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/harves...

The proteins that have been introduced into foods, to this point in time, have all been shown to be readily digestible and not similar to any known toxins or allergens.

And don't use some crap source like Greenpeace or some conspiracy theory website if you're going to make a counterpoint.