I have absolutely no problem at all with going to metaphysics-- my opinion has always been that science has no place in religion, and vice versa. The formulation you're presenting (i.e. God is omnipotent and omniscient, he (or she;) is capable of instantaneous action at any point in the universe, and no measuring device we can make can detect his actions) has nothing to do with intelligent design; it's the classical religious formulation of God. I do not and have not ever had any problem with anyone who chooses to believe in God. I'm a scientist (Ph.D. in biochemistry, amateur interest in physics) and I do not and will not get into religious discussions with other scientists; God by whatever name, or the lack thereof, is outside the realm of science and therefore pointless to talk about in a scientific context.
My issue with ID, electric universers, etc. is that they're disagreeing with current scientific theories, and attempting to promulgate alternative conjectures that are non-negatable, make no positive predictions, and fail to account for all of the current data in hand. When the holes in their conjecture (these formulations are NOT theories by any scientific standard, for the reasons above) are pointed out, the usual response is that the critic is holding onto the old entrenched theory because of inertia, or an unwillingness to seriously consider something new. Not so! General relativity is accepted as a theory because tens of thousands of physicists have been working for a hundred years, and have yet to poke a major hole in it. Believe me, it's not for lack of wanting to. The first physicist who discovers a fundamental contradiction that negates GR is going to have his or her career made in one moment.
Tens of thousands of evolutionary and molecular biologists have spent over a hundred years taking Darwin's original ideas, and working them into the current theory (that, down deep, has very little to do with Darwin's original hypothesis) that gives us a really good explaination as to how things could have evolved to the current state, and has made very powerful predictions on things like speed of genetic drift & etc. None of these things say anything about religion, though. When religion wants to talk about how things have and continue to work in the real universe we live in, it had better be prepared to back those statements up with some explainations. Otherwise, it's just gonna sound like a first grader's science fair project-- cute, amusing, has potential, but to someone who has worked in the field and is familiar with the currently available data, fundamentally silly.
I've heard several formulations of Intelligent Design, and I've yet to hear one that doesn't come into conflict w/ basic physics, much less the tons of data we have on cosmology or evolution. The only exception is the purely theistic formulation, that an external Designer set up whatever existed pre-big-bang to such exacting tolerances that it produced, as designed, the universe we observe today. Without getting into the violations of the uncertainty principle in the early universe, this formulation is o.k., in that it's restricting itself to metaphysics and not actually saying anything about how our universe actually works.
As soon as you start allowing the Designer to tinker with the universe in motion (designing Humans, apes, and other such forms of life) you run into serious basic physics issues-- where is the designer? If the Designer is designing the whole universe, how is the Designer transmitting the designs to various places without violating c? What particles transmit the forces from the Designer to the designed? At what energy would be expect to see such particles in collider experiments, and why have they not been observed? If the designer is interacting with matter (i.e. atoms in DNA), and the interaction is not being transmitted by particles, how are the changes being effected? If you can't posit a rigorous theory, can you at least suggest a theoretical framework?
When I've asked these questions of those who have suggested ID to me as an alternative theory to our current physical and evolutionary theories of how our universe works, I've only gotten blank stares, or a bunch of mishmash that 1)is non-negatable and 2)progresses from a complete lack of understanding of basic physics and molecular biology. I would truly, truly love to see a formulation of ID that isn't in basic disagreement with the observed way the universe works, but what I've read and heard so far is completely lacking along those lines. I'd be thrilled to be shown to be wrong, please do so if you can.
"By the same token, I could criticize your statements as dubiously adherent to an entrenched model that you probably know far less about than you're letting on."
If you get tired of posting here, I'm sure the ID'ers would welcome your support.
Simple fact is, theories that get entrenched tend to do so for a reason-- they fit the currently available data, and nobody's come up with a better explaination yet. If you don't like the current explaination (presence of ether circa 1901, black holes, evolution, etc), feel free to propose an alternative theory that accounts for current data, can make positive predictions of future experimental or observational results, and can be negated. Contrary to a lot of the BS I hear from electric universe/ID/etc folks, when an alternative theory that fulfills these conditions is brought forward (i.e. special & general relativity), it tends to take off like lightning after a few years, not beaten away by the establishment forever.
You are such an idiot I don't even know where to start. I'm not worried about protecting my kid from video gamers, I just hope I can protect him from self-rightous fundie neo-cons.
I don't "sit on my hands", I have and continue to teach him the difference between fantasy and reality. I've also taught him compassion and care for his fellow human beings, and how to think critically about the choices in his life. And I thank FSM that he's being raised by me and my wife and all of our friends here in our city, and hell and gone away from your villiage.
do the studios ever take action to trace ripped copies?
Yes. They can and they have traced them back to the person the screeners were given to (see third paragraph from the bottom). Did the studios do anything?
Yes, they sued and got a default judgement for $300k. Sounds effective to me.
Where's the (-1 Incorrect statement presented as absolute fact) mod button?
In Montana and Washington it is legal to exceed the speed limit to pass on a two lane road. Actually, Washington has some of the most sane traffic laws and enforcements I've seen-- I've actually seen somebody get pulled over while doing ~5mph below the speed limit in the left hand lane (on I-90 in Eastern Wa). The cars (including yours truly) that were blowing past him on the right (I was doing about two MPH over the speed limit) were ignorred by the WSP's. They'll also pull you over if you're slowing down more than 5 or 6 cars on a two lane. Not bad (especially when compared to the CHP, they'll blow past you by 90, and the motorcycle cops will scratch your mirrors while splitting lanes, but if they want to bust you at 5 over during rush hour and create a monster traffic jam that slows everybody down, they will).
Adds too much to the cost? The 30GB photo is $350, the 20GB monochrome is $300. Adding the color screen is only a 17% price increase, and you get 50% more storage space to boot.
I have the 30GB photo, and several of my friends have 20GB mono models. I can assure you, the color screen makes navigation much easier, as well as making the calendar and solitare functions actually usable. But I guess to each their own...
Doesn't this sound reminiscant of the days when the first color PDAs and color phones were coming out? Same arguements, will probably end up the same place (other than the very budget end, how many mono PDAs and phones do you see on shelves today?)
Why hasn't apple made a high-end flash player w/ a display & etc? It seems really simple to me. Apple makes a pretty good margin on its harddrive players (at least compared to the shuffle). It's a proven product. Jobs isn't going to risk hurting the hard drive player sales by competing against them with a high-end flash player. So they introduced a flash player into the only market segment (sub-$200) that wasn't populated w/ an existing player. Compared w/ a harddrive player, the shuffle really doesn't work as well with the itunes library model where you sync all of your songs between your PC and your ipod, and build playlists of the tunes you want to hear. It's good marketing, creates and entry level product, and simplifies the product. (obviously, yes, I've drunk the Kool-Aid. And then wondered why I waited so long;)
"it can't be too hard to brute force number-only PINs."
Yeah, especially since all the ATM cards I've ever used use only four digit PINs (securing all of your cash with a 14bit key???)
I doubt if you'd even have to brute force it. Look in the right places, you can probably find the hashing algorithm (even if they're not using something obvious, which they probably are). Just generate all 10000 hashes and use it as a lookup table for all the cards you can get your hands on. Yikes.
Notice I said "... be allowed to drive on public roads with no problems".
You don't have to register a vehicle. Any more than anyone is forcing you to register your copy of WoW. But, if you want to make use of somebody else's property, you have to get their permission. In many cases that permission takes the form of a registration in which you pay the owner a fee, and they issue you documentation of your granted permission to use their property (e.g. a registration document).
In the case of the (public) roads, the owners are the public. The public has designated an authority (your State DoT) to regulate the use of that property. If you don't want to register your car, fine. You just can't bring it onto the public property. Leave it in your garage (or drive it around your cornfield to your heart's content). Nobody cares.
You may argue that the roads are your property, and you should be able to use them as you will. You individually are a very small minority holder of the roads. The majority owners have decided to have a designated authority collect fees for them. The fact that I own a few shares of PepsiCo doesn't allow me to get free Pepsi, and the fact that you "own" a single "share" of your state doesn't entitle you to use the property of that state for free. You have to register a car for use on public roads because the owners of the place you'd like to drive says you have to. If you want to buzz around a racetrack, you don't have to get a license tag.
(Notice that I'm ignoring crazy states like California where you have to pay a "planned non operation" fee for a vehicle that you're going to keep on private property. That's a whole 'nuther kettle of fish, and I feel an over-reach by the government, but Cali's government is famous for overreaching).
When you buy a car and register it; does your registration transfer over to the new owner when you sell the car?
Of course not. But, if someone sells you a car, and you have the title signed over to you, you can then register the car with your state, and be allowed to drive on public roads with no problems.
Honestly, it seems like Blizzard's EULA specifically allows this. If I were the OP, I'd make photocopies of the CD key, the receipt for sale (you did get a receipt from the seller, right?), and Blizzards EULA. Send the copies, along with a letter describing the situation and your efforts to remedy it, to your state Attorney General's department of consumer protection (or whatever your state calls it) asking them to help.
Then, send a copy of that letter, all the documentation, & etc to Blizzard, via registered mail, indicating that you've filed a consumer protection complaint w/ your State AG and ask them to come into compliance with their EULA and activate your account ASAP. I've only had to do something like this once, and it lit a fire under the company I was dealing with immediately. I dunno if the AG ever contacted them, but they had the problem fixed within a week.
If a person engages in an illegal behavior that is not intended to, but does result in the death of another, then that person is guilty of manslaughter, right?
So, if a woman, who does not know she was pregnant, goes on a drug binge and OD's, triggering a miscarriage, she would be guilty of manslaughter, right?
For that matter, if a woman was pregnant, and knowingly changed her diet to one that was completely deficient in folic acid, as well as several other vitamins, it is very likely that she would spontaneously abort (would be challenging, but not impossible). By your definition she would be guilty of murder. It would be premeditated. The amusing thing about your position is that in many states, this premeditated "murder" would make the woman eligible for murder (excuse me, capital punishment to republicans).
Sorry, your points are also invalid (like the rest of the neoconservatives that will do anything it can to prevent an American woman from having an abortion but is more than happy to start wars in the third world, resulting in thousands of innocent civilian deaths).
Or, as many of us in California would like right now, just split us off entirely.
We're already in the top 10 world economies, and pay considerably more in federal taxes than we get back in federal spending. Our vote for president is nearly worthless, and b/c of the massive population differences, my voice in the Senate carries only about 6% of the weight it did back when I lived in Kansas (on a per capita basis). We've got established agriculture, manufacturing, and plenty of natural resources.
We're frankly getting a little tired of having people from the rest of the country simultaneously take from us, and tell us what to do. Enough already! (If the folks from WA and OR want to come along, that'd be great too. Seattle has good beer.)
Is there a reference for them spraying roundup on people's fields? 'Cause that would be pretty stupid indeed.
1) People in rural areas notice strangers 2) People in rural areas really notice strangers spraying stuff on somebody's fields 3) To check it, the men-in-suits would have to return to the scene later. People in rural areas really, really notice strangers driving around multiple times. 4) To check multiple fields, you're gonna have to drive around and around multiple times, and manually record whether or not a particular field is susceptible.
It would be far, far easier to drive around once, pick a couple of plants from the edge of a field, never come back to draw additional attention. Take the samples back to the lab, one guy, couple of plates of high-throughput PCR, and you have the answer within a day of sampling. No evidence that you were ever there.
Of course they do, but as you point out, before planting, not after sprouting. W/ roundup ready plants, you spray after emergence to kill everything that's not carrying glyphosate resistance.
A naturally occuring hybrid could (theoretically, never been observed) appear. But it would still be genetically distinct from the monsanto plant. No need to radioactively tag seed, several methods for detecting the monsanto construct have been published, look up Jankiewicz et al, 1999, Euro Food Res. Technol. 209: 77-82 for the "official" method.
Of course, using a naturally occuring hybrid and a post-emergent dose of roundup will not get you off the hook-- I'm sure Monsanto's patents cover the ues of glyphosate resistant plants in this manner. Whether you used a naturally occuring hybrid or re-engineered it yourself, you'd still be violating their IP for commercial use and could find yourself being sued.
In the long run, it'll make glyphosate useless as a herbicide. There are already several weeds that have picked up roundup resistance from the beans, and widespread use in people's lawn grass, along with incorrect usage of the weedkiller (insufficient dosage) will skyrocket the resistance around.
If your crop was to be contaminated by pollen from Monsanto's seed, and you do not spray with roundup but grew your crop using conventional techniques,
1) Monsanto would never know about it and 2) They'd definitly not say anything, it's more likely that you'd go after them in court than the other way around.
Farmers that "unintentionally" end up w/ roundup ready seed, but then exploit that by spraying their crops w/ roundup to decrease weeds and increase production, will most likely end up getting sued. It's not just posessing Monsanto's genes, but utilizing that for commercial gain, that makes you vulnerable to a lawsuit.
Slashdot Mirror
I have absolutely no problem at all with going to metaphysics-- my opinion has always been that science has no place in religion, and vice versa. The formulation you're presenting (i.e. God is omnipotent and omniscient, he (or she ;) is capable of instantaneous action at any point in the universe, and no measuring device we can make can detect his actions) has nothing to do with intelligent design; it's the classical religious formulation of God. I do not and have not ever had any problem with anyone who chooses to believe in God. I'm a scientist (Ph.D. in biochemistry, amateur interest in physics) and I do not and will not get into religious discussions with other scientists; God by whatever name, or the lack thereof, is outside the realm of science and therefore pointless to talk about in a scientific context.
My issue with ID, electric universers, etc. is that they're disagreeing with current scientific theories, and attempting to promulgate alternative conjectures that are non-negatable, make no positive predictions, and fail to account for all of the current data in hand. When the holes in their conjecture (these formulations are NOT theories by any scientific standard, for the reasons above) are pointed out, the usual response is that the critic is holding onto the old entrenched theory because of inertia, or an unwillingness to seriously consider something new. Not so! General relativity is accepted as a theory because tens of thousands of physicists have been working for a hundred years, and have yet to poke a major hole in it. Believe me, it's not for lack of wanting to. The first physicist who discovers a fundamental contradiction that negates GR is going to have his or her career made in one moment.
Tens of thousands of evolutionary and molecular biologists have spent over a hundred years taking Darwin's original ideas, and working them into the current theory (that, down deep, has very little to do with Darwin's original hypothesis) that gives us a really good explaination as to how things could have evolved to the current state, and has made very powerful predictions on things like speed of genetic drift & etc. None of these things say anything about religion, though. When religion wants to talk about how things have and continue to work in the real universe we live in, it had better be prepared to back those statements up with some explainations. Otherwise, it's just gonna sound like a first grader's science fair project-- cute, amusing, has potential, but to someone who has worked in the field and is familiar with the currently available data, fundamentally silly.
I've heard several formulations of Intelligent Design, and I've yet to hear one that doesn't come into conflict w/ basic physics, much less the tons of data we have on cosmology or evolution. The only exception is the purely theistic formulation, that an external Designer set up whatever existed pre-big-bang to such exacting tolerances that it produced, as designed, the universe we observe today. Without getting into the violations of the uncertainty principle in the early universe, this formulation is o.k., in that it's restricting itself to metaphysics and not actually saying anything about how our universe actually works.
As soon as you start allowing the Designer to tinker with the universe in motion (designing Humans, apes, and other such forms of life) you run into serious basic physics issues-- where is the designer? If the Designer is designing the whole universe, how is the Designer transmitting the designs to various places without violating c? What particles transmit the forces from the Designer to the designed? At what energy would be expect to see such particles in collider experiments, and why have they not been observed? If the designer is interacting with matter (i.e. atoms in DNA), and the interaction is not being transmitted by particles, how are the changes being effected? If you can't posit a rigorous theory, can you at least suggest a theoretical framework?
When I've asked these questions of those who have suggested ID to me as an alternative theory to our current physical and evolutionary theories of how our universe works, I've only gotten blank stares, or a bunch of mishmash that 1)is non-negatable and 2)progresses from a complete lack of understanding of basic physics and molecular biology. I would truly, truly love to see a formulation of ID that isn't in basic disagreement with the observed way the universe works, but what I've read and heard so far is completely lacking along those lines. I'd be thrilled to be shown to be wrong, please do so if you can.
"By the same token, I could criticize your statements as dubiously adherent to an entrenched model that you probably know far less about than you're letting on."
If you get tired of posting here, I'm sure the ID'ers would welcome your support.
Simple fact is, theories that get entrenched tend to do so for a reason-- they fit the currently available data, and nobody's come up with a better explaination yet. If you don't like the current explaination (presence of ether circa 1901, black holes, evolution, etc), feel free to propose an alternative theory that accounts for current data, can make positive predictions of future experimental or observational results, and can be negated. Contrary to a lot of the BS I hear from electric universe/ID/etc folks, when an alternative theory that fulfills these conditions is brought forward (i.e. special & general relativity), it tends to take off like lightning after a few years, not beaten away by the establishment forever.
You've obviously never gotten an e-mail from your mistress....
You are such an idiot I don't even know where to start. I'm not worried about protecting my kid from video gamers, I just hope I can protect him from self-rightous fundie neo-cons.
I don't "sit on my hands", I have and continue to teach him the difference between fantasy and reality. I've also taught him compassion and care for his fellow human beings, and how to think critically about the choices in his life. And I thank FSM that he's being raised by me and my wife and all of our friends here in our city, and hell and gone away from your villiage.
do the studios ever take action to trace ripped copies?
Yes. They can and they have traced them back to the person the screeners were given to (see third paragraph from the bottom). Did the studios do anything?
Yes, they sued and got a default judgement for $300k. Sounds effective to me.
IMO no one will confuse... Tiger Anal Lube, with Tiger Direct.
You've obviously never done business with Tiger Direct...
Where's the (-1 Incorrect statement presented as absolute fact) mod button?
In Montana and Washington it is legal to exceed the speed limit to pass on a two lane road. Actually, Washington has some of the most sane traffic laws and enforcements I've seen-- I've actually seen somebody get pulled over while doing ~5mph below the speed limit in the left hand lane (on I-90 in Eastern Wa). The cars (including yours truly) that were blowing past him on the right (I was doing about two MPH over the speed limit) were ignorred by the WSP's. They'll also pull you over if you're slowing down more than 5 or 6 cars on a two lane. Not bad (especially when compared to the CHP, they'll blow past you by 90, and the motorcycle cops will scratch your mirrors while splitting lanes, but if they want to bust you at 5 over during rush hour and create a monster traffic jam that slows everybody down, they will).
Adds too much to the cost? The 30GB photo is $350, the 20GB monochrome is $300. Adding the color screen is only a 17% price increase, and you get 50% more storage space to boot.
;)
I have the 30GB photo, and several of my friends have 20GB mono models. I can assure you, the color screen makes navigation much easier, as well as making the calendar and solitare functions actually usable. But I guess to each their own...
Doesn't this sound reminiscant of the days when the first color PDAs and color phones were coming out? Same arguements, will probably end up the same place (other than the very budget end, how many mono PDAs and phones do you see on shelves today?)
Why hasn't apple made a high-end flash player w/ a display & etc? It seems really simple to me. Apple makes a pretty good margin on its harddrive players (at least compared to the shuffle). It's a proven product. Jobs isn't going to risk hurting the hard drive player sales by competing against them with a high-end flash player. So they introduced a flash player into the only market segment (sub-$200) that wasn't populated w/ an existing player. Compared w/ a harddrive player, the shuffle really doesn't work as well with the itunes library model where you sync all of your songs between your PC and your ipod, and build playlists of the tunes you want to hear. It's good marketing, creates and entry level product, and simplifies the product. (obviously, yes, I've drunk the Kool-Aid. And then wondered why I waited so long
And in other news, McDonalds sez "Burger King is bad for you! Try our new salads!"
It's a trade dress issue. See: this at the INTA website.
Nielsen answers your question here.
"it can't be too hard to brute force number-only PINs."
Yeah, especially since all the ATM cards I've ever used use only four digit PINs (securing all of your cash with a 14bit key???)
I doubt if you'd even have to brute force it. Look in the right places, you can probably find the hashing algorithm (even if they're not using something obvious, which they probably are). Just generate all 10000 hashes and use it as a lookup table for all the cards you can get your hands on. Yikes.
Notice I said "... be allowed to drive on public roads with no problems".
You don't have to register a vehicle. Any more than anyone is forcing you to register your copy of WoW. But, if you want to make use of somebody else's property, you have to get their permission. In many cases that permission takes the form of a registration in which you pay the owner a fee, and they issue you documentation of your granted permission to use their property (e.g. a registration document).
In the case of the (public) roads, the owners are the public. The public has designated an authority (your State DoT) to regulate the use of that property. If you don't want to register your car, fine. You just can't bring it onto the public property. Leave it in your garage (or drive it around your cornfield to your heart's content). Nobody cares.
You may argue that the roads are your property, and you should be able to use them as you will. You individually are a very small minority holder of the roads. The majority owners have decided to have a designated authority collect fees for them. The fact that I own a few shares of PepsiCo doesn't allow me to get free Pepsi, and the fact that you "own" a single "share" of your state doesn't entitle you to use the property of that state for free. You have to register a car for use on public roads because the owners of the place you'd like to drive says you have to. If you want to buzz around a racetrack, you don't have to get a license tag.
(Notice that I'm ignoring crazy states like California where you have to pay a "planned non operation" fee for a vehicle that you're going to keep on private property. That's a whole 'nuther kettle of fish, and I feel an over-reach by the government, but Cali's government is famous for overreaching).
Of course not. But, if someone sells you a car, and you have the title signed over to you, you can then register the car with your state, and be allowed to drive on public roads with no problems.
Honestly, it seems like Blizzard's EULA specifically allows this. If I were the OP, I'd make photocopies of the CD key, the receipt for sale (you did get a receipt from the seller, right?), and Blizzards EULA. Send the copies, along with a letter describing the situation and your efforts to remedy it, to your state Attorney General's department of consumer protection (or whatever your state calls it) asking them to help.
Then, send a copy of that letter, all the documentation, & etc to Blizzard, via registered mail, indicating that you've filed a consumer protection complaint w/ your State AG and ask them to come into compliance with their EULA and activate your account ASAP. I've only had to do something like this once, and it lit a fire under the company I was dealing with immediately. I dunno if the AG ever contacted them, but they had the problem fixed within a week.
Obviously, they should make the link to the main story blink.
Yes, sigh, here we go again.
If a person engages in an illegal behavior that is not intended to, but does result in the death of another, then that person is guilty of manslaughter, right?
So, if a woman, who does not know she was pregnant, goes on a drug binge and OD's, triggering a miscarriage, she would be guilty of manslaughter, right?
For that matter, if a woman was pregnant, and knowingly changed her diet to one that was completely deficient in folic acid, as well as several other vitamins, it is very likely that she would spontaneously abort (would be challenging, but not impossible). By your definition she would be guilty of murder. It would be premeditated. The amusing thing about your position is that in many states, this premeditated "murder" would make the woman eligible for murder (excuse me, capital punishment to republicans).
Sorry, your points are also invalid (like the rest of the neoconservatives that will do anything it can to prevent an American woman from having an abortion but is more than happy to start wars in the third world, resulting in thousands of innocent civilian deaths).
Or, as many of us in California would like right now, just split us off entirely.
We're already in the top 10 world economies, and pay considerably more in federal taxes than we get back in federal spending. Our vote for president is nearly worthless, and b/c of the massive population differences, my voice in the Senate carries only about 6% of the weight it did back when I lived in Kansas (on a per capita basis). We've got established agriculture, manufacturing, and plenty of natural resources.
We're frankly getting a little tired of having people from the rest of the country simultaneously take from us, and tell us what to do. Enough already! (If the folks from WA and OR want to come along, that'd be great too. Seattle has good beer.)
Is there a reference for them spraying roundup on people's fields? 'Cause that would be pretty stupid indeed.
1) People in rural areas notice strangers
2) People in rural areas really notice strangers spraying stuff on somebody's fields
3) To check it, the men-in-suits would have to return to the scene later. People in rural areas really, really notice strangers driving around multiple times.
4) To check multiple fields, you're gonna have to drive around and around multiple times, and manually record whether or not a particular field is susceptible.
It would be far, far easier to drive around once, pick a couple of plants from the edge of a field, never come back to draw additional attention. Take the samples back to the lab, one guy, couple of plates of high-throughput PCR, and you have the answer within a day of sampling. No evidence that you were ever there.
Of course they do, but as you point out, before planting, not after sprouting. W/ roundup ready plants, you spray after emergence to kill everything that's not carrying glyphosate resistance.
A naturally occuring hybrid could (theoretically, never been observed) appear. But it would still be genetically distinct from the monsanto plant. No need to radioactively tag seed, several methods for detecting the monsanto construct have been published, look up Jankiewicz et al, 1999, Euro Food Res. Technol. 209: 77-82 for the "official" method.
Of course, using a naturally occuring hybrid and a post-emergent dose of roundup will not get you off the hook-- I'm sure Monsanto's patents cover the ues of glyphosate resistant plants in this manner. Whether you used a naturally occuring hybrid or re-engineered it yourself, you'd still be violating their IP for commercial use and could find yourself being sued.
In the long run, it'll make glyphosate useless as a herbicide. There are already several weeds that have picked up roundup resistance from the beans, and widespread use in people's lawn grass, along with incorrect usage of the weedkiller (insufficient dosage) will skyrocket the resistance around.
If your crop was to be contaminated by pollen from Monsanto's seed, and you do not spray with roundup but grew your crop using conventional techniques,
1) Monsanto would never know about it and
2) They'd definitly not say anything, it's more likely that you'd go after them in court than the other way around.
Farmers that "unintentionally" end up w/ roundup ready seed, but then exploit that by spraying their crops w/ roundup to decrease weeds and increase production, will most likely end up getting sued. It's not just posessing Monsanto's genes, but utilizing that for commercial gain, that makes you vulnerable to a lawsuit.
CD: 74 minutes (tops) entertainment for $15: $12/hour
Movie (theater): 2 hours (tops) for $12: $6/hour
Videogame (i.e. KOTOR): 30 hours (minimum) for $50: $1.60/ hour
This is definitly simplistic, but in terms of hours of entertainment/ dollar, videogames are a decent bargain.
But the real question is, will there be a curling minigame?
Invader Zim on netflix, as requested.
You forgot "Think of the children!"