I wasn't referring to them, I was specifically referring to classic STD : bugs which ride the secretions of male and female genitalia to jump across partner during the sexual act.
So, you don't consider anal warts to be an STD? Tricky things, definitions.
I do not remember which ones they are, but there are several STD's that can be transmitted even if the male is wearing a condom and it works as designed.
Crabs (pubic lice) for one. And I wouldn't like to come in contact with a primary syphilis sore ("chanker", IIRC) with any part of my body. Herpes simplex as someone else has pointed out, can be present on any part of the body, and so presumably can be spread by any bodily contact (e.g., handshake ; cue Michael Jackson jokes - he may have been mad, but that doesn't mean that the mask was irrational). I'm sure there are others. Also there are, as you point out, any number of diseases that can be spread by intimate and casual contact. Chickenpox, for example, is generally considered a disease of casual contact, but I'd be astonished if it had never been transmitted by sexual contact either. In that respect, the whole concept of an "STD" Sexually Transmitted Disease may be rather misleading - rather there are some diseases that have dominant transmission through sexual activity, some that have minor transmission through sexual activity, and some with many vectors. How, for example, would you classify DFTD, considering that "aggressive mating" is a major route of transmission?
well Journalists arn't normaly that techie (even 99% of the technology ones) and for and for on the move journalist a webmail system does have a lot of advantages.
Neglecting the spelling and grammar which you should be ashamed of, the use of a convenient webmail system does not preclude the use of encryption outside the webmail system. Viz : on your laptop, you write your super-secret email ; you then run it through your encryption package to produce a blob of data ; you then use your webmail account to transfer the data blob to the recipient (taking whatever traffic-analysis countermeasures you want).
I'm a mobile worker ; I routinely use webmail (both the company one, and third-parties like Ymail and Gahoo) ; I've never considered using webmail to be an adequate excuse for slackening off on the confidentiality of the client's data, and if they want me to take such risks, I'll get their instruction in writing before I do it.
(A real-world practicality : I put the encrypted file inside a ZIP container to protect against transmission errors, and I write some uninteresting blurb in the message body. A zip file attachment with no message body is likely to attract attention.)
...and for what it's worth, just because one has been driving for many years, doesn't necessarily mean they are a better, safer driver. Many people will sooner or later start developing bad habits and grow increasingly lax.
...and for what it's worth, just because one has been driving for many years, doesn't necessarily mean they are a better, safer driver. All people will develop bad habits and grow increasingly lax. FTFY
Most people will deny this, and the more strongly they deny it, more likely the worse a driver they are. The denial does not, of course, make it any less true.
Alternatively, you could just fight back by not buying any Sony products in the future but contacting them now to tell them of your decision. After all, the PS3 is a luxury item and not a necessity. This is the only thing that will get their attention (i.e. it affects their profitability!). The message will not get through overnight, but it will dawn on them eventually.
Which would most seriously affect their profitability - not buying the machinery at all, or buying one of the machines and using it as a general purpose machine while not buying any games for it? I recall (vaguely - I'm not into games at all ; the Wii I got for the wife and daughter for Xmas hasn't been connected to the TV for over 2 months now ; I was less than keen on getting the TV) that most of these special purpose games machines cost more to build than their street price, with the profit coming from online gaming fees, over-priced games, etc. So, it is possible (see above question) that the nastiest thing to do to Sony would be to buy a PS-whatever and use it as (for example) a media/file server / web terminal / whatever , then fill in the registration card explaining this in detail and send it off to Sony. (Actually, I'm now wondering if I can do the same with the Wii? Have to power it up again one day when I've got time, as well as get an ethernet adaptor for it.) I don't have any particular beef against Sony, but I've had to struggle with various of their machines over the years and can't say that I'm impressed.
You used to, but they opened it up to everyone a couple years ago.
I still think the best solution overall is to just not use Facebook at all:)
Assuming that you have some home-related reason to be on FaceBook in particular (I have ; sisters are on it already ; just spent 20 minutes tightening-down the privacy settings), then have a home-FaceBook and a work-BeBo (or some similar arrangement) and simply don't fill do anything other than the most banal and tedious of updates on the work-BeBo page. So hopefully, if someone searches for Joe Bloggs and ParanoidMegaCorp, they'll come across the BeBo page of dullness, not the FaceBook page where you never mention ParanoidMegaCorp at all.
I don't understand social networking. Whatever happened to going down the pub to meet your mates? But I'm an old fart now ; I more than half-seriously considered dumping the broadband connection recently.
visits from a girlfriend won't be allowed during the project
I take it, then, that all the volunteers are gay?
I'm not up on all of this week's acronymphomania. The WTF are a bunch of homosexual pseudo-wrestlers like the panda-molesters of the WWF and the preverts of the WWE ? (I take the acronyms from a South Park episode I saw a year or so back. I think.)
Sneering at the "you grunt and I'll groan" brigade aside... it sounds like it'll be an interesting piece of experimental archaeology. And the bragging rights that the surviving students will have for future years... big plus. I nearly envy them. The closest to practical archaeology I'll get in the foreseeable future will be a week in a peat bog on Skye. Joy!
The problem is that the can take other people with them when Darwin calls.
You've missed the point : the spike protrudes from the steering wheel so that the most likely person to be killed, even by a successful emergency stop, would be the driver. Coating the spike with poison (slow-acting, for preference) which makes the death slow, noisy and very very spectacularly gory might improve the effectiveness of the tool, as would banning the treatment of the drivers of crashed cars in hospitals. (Not denying treatment, simply requiring it to be done at their residence. Complete with screaming through the night and other reminders of the entertainment.)
To be fair, you'd have to rescind all drivers licenses on introduction of the "reverse airbag" ; the drivers who survive the emergency brake part of their driving test will probably have a rather lower average speed. Which is the intended effect. OK, a few pedestrians would be killed with the additional testing etc, but they'd be negligible compare to the number of dead drivers. Until the lesson gets absorbed. (Point for discussion : should driving instructors be allowed to clean the blood, guts and bone of their failed students off the "reverse airbag", or should they be required to leave the mess on the "reverse airbag" to rot and fester so it acts as a reminder to the driver.)
The "reverse airbag" is a "ha-ha-but-serious" debating tactic. For decades (longer than I've had a driving license), I've promoted the idea that your driving license should only be valid for a few years - five or ten is open for discussion - before it is revoked and the driving test must be passed again. that's not a debating tactic ; that's a serious proposition. Most licensed drivers would fail the test if they had to sit it today.
Israel is nuclear-armed, don't forget. No other state in that area is. If Iran gets too close, they're going to be nuked.
And if a third-party power decided to sell a few dozen under-the-counter more-or-less obsolete warheads to Iran, which the Iranians could fit onto their already-launchable ballistic missiles... just who is going to be nuking whom? And who would win? And before you reply just think carefully as to which "third-party" power I'm talking about. Because I've got a short list of three credible ones and several others who could be fronts for the three most-credible ones.
The genie of nuclear proliferation is out of the bottle of containment. Live with it.
Well in fairness it has a little bit to do with China. That whole censorship thing.
Well, in fairness, it is their country and their rules. They've got as much right to enforce their laws in their country as, for example, an American state has to judicially murder it's own citizens. You may like Chinese censorship laws as much as I like American judicial murder policies, but our likes and dislikes don't change our (non-existent) right to interfere in the internal policies of a country.
Or is the US planning to invade China in the near future in protest against the Chinese censorship policies?
So tired of the "news" sites that can't even link the original source anymore. I hit the source link and goes to someones blog with a source link to someone else's blog, that might have the original story.
It is pathetic, isn't it? My normal algorithm, when I see something sufficiently interesting, is to RTFA to find the most unusual name for one of the authors (or several if there are ; double check that the name isn't a commentator), then to Google for that author (or authors). very soon you'll find an article that tells you which one of the major science publications the source is in. Most of them are available in abstract form for free ; often your university library will be able to provide you with access (you're not in at least part-time education at a legitimate establishment? I'm sorry to hear of your incapacitating disease and impending death.)
News that comes out on Fridays (US time) is probably from Science ; Nature dis-embargoes things on Wednesday evenings (UK time); PLOS and PNAS are (I think) on Mondays (US time again) ; the rest are pretty random. How long it is before the blogosphere picks up on things... is rather more variable.
Alternatively, if you're tired of following the blogosphere's useless cross-quoting, just go directly to the original sources. All of the major journals have email distributions of contents, often an RSS feed too if that's what you like. Cut out the regurgitation and start from the sources! (Oh, sorry, that kills the advertising industry. Send me an email address and I'll PayPal you £0.10 as a contribution to your bus fare to go and find someone who gives a fuck.) On which subject, it's Friday, it's lunchtime, so it's Science's contents... anything interesting?
Reviews - Materials and Mechanics for Stretchable Electronics
Swine Flu Pandemic - What's Old Is New: 1918 Virus Matches 2009 H1N1 Strain New findings, reported online this week in Science and Science Translational Medicine indicate that the surface protein, hemagglutinin, of the "novel" H1N1 swine influenza virus that last year caused the first human pandemic in 4 decades closely matches the HA in the H1N1 virus responsible for the 1918 pandemic.
Strontium-Doped Perovskites Rival Platinum Catalysts for Treating NOx in Simulated Diesel Exhaust
Is there any reason not to assume that this is just an H. erectus?
As the original article says, "Assuming an average divergence of human and chimpanzee mtDNAs of 6 million years ago, the date of the most recent common mtDNA ancestor shared by the Denisova hominin, Neanderthals and modern humans is approximately one million years ago (mean = 1,040,900 years ago; 779,300-1,313,500 years ago, 95% highest posterior density (HPD)), or twice as deep as the most recent common mtDNA ancestor of modern humans and Neanderthals (mean = 465,700 years ago; 321,200-618,000 years ago, 95% HPD) (Fig. 3)."
So, the evidence isn't "against" it being a Homo erectus (are there any credible DNA samples from erectus? The original paper implies not (ref 15).), it's that it's something that diverged from the hominin bush at a different time to the Neanderthals. Which doesn't prove that it's a new species, but the evidence is suggestive. And that (an "unknown hominin" which has a common ancestor with modern humans and Neanderthals at about a million years ago) is what the paper claims. Not a new species.
On a terminological note : current ICZN practice is that they need a type specimen to hang a species name off. A set of mtDNA sequences doesn't (yet) constitute a type specimen. That may change... or it may not. Or maybe further work on these samples (combined with additional fieldwork and possible new samples) will obviate the issue by providing a better possible holotype.
Uh... I think the idea is to give a probability that someone is both male and over 18, so that if they pose as someone younger than 18 and/or female then they will be given away.
That certainly sounds less incredible than imputing ones mental habits from one's typing characteristics.
The big, obvious problem with this is that the software would have to reside on the computer of the person who may or may not be posing as someone younger, in order to assess their typing in realtime, which seems to me a fatal flaw.
That's definitely a problem. you'd need something that could hook into the pretty raw data stream from the keyboard... which would be exactly the sort of data that a key-logger application would desire too. On a scale of "zero" to "not-well-thought-out", I think this scores "bullshit". It'll probably become compulsory.
If Canada didn't do the same they'd be stuck with a bunch Americans who came over the border with their drivers licenses and couldn't easily pass back into the US for lack of the required passport.
Isn't that what the concept of "refugee camp" was invented for? It'd be quite amusing to watch a few thousand Americans starving and in rags. Oh, wait a minute - isn't that what America promotes homelessness for - public entertainment?
Errr, assuming that you're claiming to be Spartacus because you're a slave and you want to facilitate the escape of your revolutionary leader from his expected death by torture... then you couldn't have a wife. Slaves under Roman law weren't allowed to marry. (Or rather, since they didn't have volition, then they couldn't take the vows. I think. IANA(roman)L.)
I think the activists may have intended the environmental impact as a way of underlining the strain massive numbers of a single species puts on an ecosystem.
Extremely unlikely ; to do so would be profoundly immoral, and despite the rantings of the speciesist majority, most people who end up getting active in animal rights have actually thought about the morality of what they choose to do. Which is why they choose to do it.
While there are a small number of nutters in the movement (any movement), most people involved are actually sane and thoughtful. So I'd expect this was the result of a cockup, not a conspiracy.
Back in the day when I was involved in the animal rights movement, in the 1980s, we were well aware of this problem. Which was why we didn't do that sort of thing. Because we knew that it would be counter-productive. If we wanted to stop the fur trade (which we did), then it's far simple and more effective to attack the demand for the product. We nearly succeeded too, just a relatively small number of dumb-fuck bimbos and fashionistas who're resurrected it in the last decade or so.
There are people who either refuse or are incapable of understanding certain concepts. Some judges fall into this category in certain areas, and one would hope it wasn't the case, but it happens, especially when judges are elected based on popularity and not appointed on merit.
Shoot the judge (using a proxy in the case that this is illegal instead of compulsory in your area). If the current judge can't handle cases like this, continue to kill them until they die off. "Just think of it as evolution in action.
35 years ago, when my father started to allow me to use power tools, he showed me how to change a drill bit in the drill : you go to the wall end of the power lead ; un-plug from the wall, and use the chuck-key that is taped to the lead at the plug end to loosen the chuck and perform the change. Turning the power off before being able to make an adjustment was built into the hardware (as modified by Dad). It was bloody annoying, took extra time (you're up a step ladder and you need to use two different bits alternatingly...), but it worked. At least as far as preventing anyone from getting a chuck-key between the eyes.
Much of the danger of a machine can be designed out (key-less chucks), if you're willing to accept different work practices. But many people are unwilling to accept differing work practices, or reduced productivity, and so they're implicitly putting a price on fingers, arms, legs and lives.
Another example : Do you see any of those idiotic Discovery-channel-type programs with several rinky-dinky little drilling rigs "drilling for oil and gas", "racing" with each other, "in a desperate struggle" to improve ratings? Lots of relatively new rigs, and so they'll hopefully be showing industry best-practice. After all, every rig I go to work on is forever telling us that "Safety Takes Overall Priority" yadda yadda, "Target Zero" injuries to personnel, or damage to equipment or the environment. Total lies and bullshit of course : everything has a price, and these retarded redneck programmes show it. Universally, they "throw the spinning chain" to make or break connections when tripping(see about 1m25s into http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TGc57k7h7pk ; turn the crap sound off ; if you can't see the digit-mashing potential, I don't want to work with you). But industry "best practice" has been to use a hydraulic system called an "iron roughneck" for over 20 years now (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j8Vy-Hoe64o). But these rinky-dinky little Mom'n'Pop rigs that they keep on filming... it's the spinning chain. Much cheaper, and appreciably quicker. What's the difference between the two? Next time you're shaking hands with a driller or toolpusher and you notice that he's missing several joints off one finger, or even several fingers... they're more likely than not casualties of the spinning chain. When a company tells you that "Safety Takes Overall Priority", you know that they're lieing. Your only task is to find out at how high a level they're lieing, and whether you're willing to work at that level of risk. (Me, I include the helicopter to work in my calculations, and they scare the shit out of me. But I carry on in the job, because despite the prospect of being in an upside down helicopter with the frigid water running down my nose, I'm actually fairly confident of my abilities to survive in such conditions. About 50% of recruits move on to a lower-risk occupation though.)
Slashdot Mirror
So, you don't consider anal warts to be an STD?
Tricky things, definitions.
Crabs (pubic lice) for one. And I wouldn't like to come in contact with a primary syphilis sore ("chanker", IIRC) with any part of my body. Herpes simplex as someone else has pointed out, can be present on any part of the body, and so presumably can be spread by any bodily contact (e.g., handshake ; cue Michael Jackson jokes - he may have been mad, but that doesn't mean that the mask was irrational). I'm sure there are others.
Also there are, as you point out, any number of diseases that can be spread by intimate and casual contact. Chickenpox, for example, is generally considered a disease of casual contact, but I'd be astonished if it had never been transmitted by sexual contact either. In that respect, the whole concept of an "STD" Sexually Transmitted Disease may be rather misleading - rather there are some diseases that have dominant transmission through sexual activity, some that have minor transmission through sexual activity, and some with many vectors. How, for example, would you classify DFTD, considering that "aggressive mating" is a major route of transmission?
Neglecting the spelling and grammar which you should be ashamed of, the use of a convenient webmail system does not preclude the use of encryption outside the webmail system. Viz : on your laptop, you write your super-secret email ; you then run it through your encryption package to produce a blob of data ; you then use your webmail account to transfer the data blob to the recipient (taking whatever traffic-analysis countermeasures you want).
I'm a mobile worker ; I routinely use webmail (both the company one, and third-parties like Ymail and Gahoo) ; I've never considered using webmail to be an adequate excuse for slackening off on the confidentiality of the client's data, and if they want me to take such risks, I'll get their instruction in writing before I do it.
(A real-world practicality : I put the encrypted file inside a ZIP container to protect against transmission errors, and I write some uninteresting blurb in the message body. A zip file attachment with no message body is likely to attract attention.)
Qualculate! being a programme that provides some services to the housing sales industry?
You married a woman who was not hot? Hand in your geek card at once!
FTFY
Most people will deny this, and the more strongly they deny it, more likely the worse a driver they are. The denial does not, of course, make it any less true.
Which would most seriously affect their profitability - not buying the machinery at all, or buying one of the machines and using it as a general purpose machine while not buying any games for it?
I recall (vaguely - I'm not into games at all ; the Wii I got for the wife and daughter for Xmas hasn't been connected to the TV for over 2 months now ; I was less than keen on getting the TV) that most of these special purpose games machines cost more to build than their street price, with the profit coming from online gaming fees, over-priced games, etc. So, it is possible (see above question) that the nastiest thing to do to Sony would be to buy a PS-whatever and use it as (for example) a media/file server / web terminal / whatever , then fill in the registration card explaining this in detail and send it off to Sony.
(Actually, I'm now wondering if I can do the same with the Wii? Have to power it up again one day when I've got time, as well as get an ethernet adaptor for it.)
I don't have any particular beef against Sony, but I've had to struggle with various of their machines over the years and can't say that I'm impressed.
Damn, that's my 5-digit one undercut. /. IDs out there to overwhelm us?
Are there any 6-digit, or even 7-digit
Beware thinking like that. What you mean by a "SAT score" may not be what other people mean.
[Oblig Futurama reference] Human Horn
Assuming that you have some home-related reason to be on FaceBook in particular (I have ; sisters are on it already ; just spent 20 minutes tightening-down the privacy settings), then have a home-FaceBook and a work-BeBo (or some similar arrangement) and simply don't fill do anything other than the most banal and tedious of updates on the work-BeBo page. So hopefully, if someone searches for Joe Bloggs and ParanoidMegaCorp, they'll come across the BeBo page of dullness, not the FaceBook page where you never mention ParanoidMegaCorp at all.
I don't understand social networking. Whatever happened to going down the pub to meet your mates? But I'm an old fart now ; I more than half-seriously considered dumping the broadband connection recently.
I'm not up on all of this week's acronymphomania. The WTF are a bunch of homosexual pseudo-wrestlers like the panda-molesters of the WWF and the preverts of the WWE ?
(I take the acronyms from a South Park episode I saw a year or so back. I think.)
Sneering at the "you grunt and I'll groan" brigade aside ... it sounds like it'll be an interesting piece of experimental archaeology. ... big plus. I nearly envy them. The closest to practical archaeology I'll get in the foreseeable future will be a week in a peat bog on Skye. Joy!
And the bragging rights that the surviving students will have for future years
You've missed the point : the spike protrudes from the steering wheel so that the most likely person to be killed, even by a successful emergency stop, would be the driver. Coating the spike with poison (slow-acting, for preference) which makes the death slow, noisy and very very spectacularly gory might improve the effectiveness of the tool, as would banning the treatment of the drivers of crashed cars in hospitals. (Not denying treatment, simply requiring it to be done at their residence. Complete with screaming through the night and other reminders of the entertainment.)
To be fair, you'd have to rescind all drivers licenses on introduction of the "reverse airbag" ; the drivers who survive the emergency brake part of their driving test will probably have a rather lower average speed. Which is the intended effect. OK, a few pedestrians would be killed with the additional testing etc, but they'd be negligible compare to the number of dead drivers. Until the lesson gets absorbed.
(Point for discussion : should driving instructors be allowed to clean the blood, guts and bone of their failed students off the "reverse airbag", or should they be required to leave the mess on the "reverse airbag" to rot and fester so it acts as a reminder to the driver.)
The "reverse airbag" is a "ha-ha-but-serious" debating tactic. For decades (longer than I've had a driving license), I've promoted the idea that your driving license should only be valid for a few years - five or ten is open for discussion - before it is revoked and the driving test must be passed again. that's not a debating tactic ; that's a serious proposition. Most licensed drivers would fail the test if they had to sit it today.
Google tetrachromacy.
(That's where it ends at the moment. If you're female.)
And if a third-party power decided to sell a few dozen under-the-counter more-or-less obsolete warheads to Iran, which the Iranians could fit onto their already-launchable ballistic missiles ... just who is going to be nuking whom? And who would win?
And before you reply just think carefully as to which "third-party" power I'm talking about. Because I've got a short list of three credible ones and several others who could be fronts for the three most-credible ones.
The genie of nuclear proliferation is out of the bottle of containment. Live with it.
Well, in fairness, it is their country and their rules. They've got as much right to enforce their laws in their country as, for example, an American state has to judicially murder it's own citizens. You may like Chinese censorship laws as much as I like American judicial murder policies, but our likes and dislikes don't change our (non-existent) right to interfere in the internal policies of a country.
Or is the US planning to invade China in the near future in protest against the Chinese censorship policies?
It is pathetic, isn't it?
My normal algorithm, when I see something sufficiently interesting, is to RTFA to find the most unusual name for one of the authors (or several if there are ; double check that the name isn't a commentator), then to Google for that author (or authors). very soon you'll find an article that tells you which one of the major science publications the source is in. Most of them are available in abstract form for free ; often your university library will be able to provide you with access (you're not in at least part-time education at a legitimate establishment? I'm sorry to hear of your incapacitating disease and impending death.)
News that comes out on Fridays (US time) is probably from Science ; Nature dis-embargoes things on Wednesday evenings (UK time); PLOS and PNAS are (I think) on Mondays (US time again) ; the rest are pretty random. How long it is before the blogosphere picks up on things ... is rather more variable.
Alternatively, if you're tired of following the blogosphere's useless cross-quoting, just go directly to the original sources. All of the major journals have email distributions of contents, often an RSS feed too if that's what you like. Cut out the regurgitation and start from the sources! (Oh, sorry, that kills the advertising industry. Send me an email address and I'll PayPal you £0.10 as a contribution to your bus fare to go and find someone who gives a fuck.) ... anything interesting?
On which subject, it's Friday, it's lunchtime, so it's Science's contents
New findings, reported online this week in Science and Science Translational Medicine indicate that the surface protein, hemagglutinin, of the "novel" H1N1 swine influenza virus that last year caused the first human pandemic in 4 decades closely matches the HA in the H1N1 virus responsible for the 1918 pandemic.
Hmmm, that swine 'flu one might be worth a read.
As the original article says,
"Assuming an average divergence of human and chimpanzee mtDNAs of 6 million years ago, the date of the most recent common mtDNA ancestor shared by the Denisova hominin, Neanderthals and modern humans is approximately one million years ago (mean = 1,040,900 years ago; 779,300-1,313,500 years ago, 95% highest posterior density (HPD)), or twice as deep as the most recent common mtDNA ancestor of modern humans and Neanderthals (mean = 465,700 years ago; 321,200-618,000 years ago, 95% HPD) (Fig. 3)."
So, the evidence isn't "against" it being a Homo erectus (are there any credible DNA samples from erectus? The original paper implies not (ref 15).), it's that it's something that diverged from the hominin bush at a different time to the Neanderthals. Which doesn't prove that it's a new species, but the evidence is suggestive. And that (an "unknown hominin" which has a common ancestor with modern humans and Neanderthals at about a million years ago) is what the paper claims. Not a new species.
On a terminological note : current ICZN practice is that they need a type specimen to hang a species name off. A set of mtDNA sequences doesn't (yet) constitute a type specimen. That may change ... or it may not. Or maybe further work on these samples (combined with additional fieldwork and possible new samples) will obviate the issue by providing a better possible holotype.
That certainly sounds less incredible than imputing ones mental habits from one's typing characteristics.
That's definitely a problem. you'd need something that could hook into the pretty raw data stream from the keyboard ... which would be exactly the sort of data that a key-logger application would desire too.
On a scale of "zero" to "not-well-thought-out", I think this scores "bullshit".
It'll probably become compulsory.
Isn't that what the concept of "refugee camp" was invented for? It'd be quite amusing to watch a few thousand Americans starving and in rags.
Oh, wait a minute - isn't that what America promotes homelessness for - public entertainment?
Errr, assuming that you're claiming to be Spartacus because you're a slave and you want to facilitate the escape of your revolutionary leader from his expected death by torture ... then you couldn't have a wife. Slaves under Roman law weren't allowed to marry. (Or rather, since they didn't have volition, then they couldn't take the vows. I think. IANA(roman)L.)
Extremely unlikely ; to do so would be profoundly immoral, and despite the rantings of the speciesist majority, most people who end up getting active in animal rights have actually thought about the morality of what they choose to do. Which is why they choose to do it.
While there are a small number of nutters in the movement (any movement), most people involved are actually sane and thoughtful. So I'd expect this was the result of a cockup, not a conspiracy.
Back in the day when I was involved in the animal rights movement, in the 1980s, we were well aware of this problem. Which was why we didn't do that sort of thing. Because we knew that it would be counter-productive. If we wanted to stop the fur trade (which we did), then it's far simple and more effective to attack the demand for the product. We nearly succeeded too, just a relatively small number of dumb-fuck bimbos and fashionistas who're resurrected it in the last decade or so.
And I contemplate whether to print the story on nice, soft paper. Enough said?
Shoot the judge (using a proxy in the case that this is illegal instead of compulsory in your area). If the current judge can't handle cases like this, continue to kill them until they die off. "Just think of it as evolution in action.
35 years ago, when my father started to allow me to use power tools, he showed me how to change a drill bit in the drill : you go to the wall end of the power lead ; un-plug from the wall, and use the chuck-key that is taped to the lead at the plug end to loosen the chuck and perform the change. ...), but it worked. At least as far as preventing anyone from getting a chuck-key between the eyes.
Turning the power off before being able to make an adjustment was built into the hardware (as modified by Dad). It was bloody annoying, took extra time (you're up a step ladder and you need to use two different bits alternatingly
Much of the danger of a machine can be designed out (key-less chucks), if you're willing to accept different work practices. But many people are unwilling to accept differing work practices, or reduced productivity, and so they're implicitly putting a price on fingers, arms, legs and lives.
Another example : ... it's the spinning chain. Much cheaper, and appreciably quicker. ... they're more likely than not casualties of the spinning chain.
Do you see any of those idiotic Discovery-channel-type programs with several rinky-dinky little drilling rigs "drilling for oil and gas", "racing" with each other, "in a desperate struggle" to improve ratings? Lots of relatively new rigs, and so they'll hopefully be showing industry best-practice. After all, every rig I go to work on is forever telling us that "Safety Takes Overall Priority" yadda yadda, "Target Zero" injuries to personnel, or damage to equipment or the environment. Total lies and bullshit of course : everything has a price, and these retarded redneck programmes show it. Universally, they "throw the spinning chain" to make or break connections when tripping(see about 1m25s into http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TGc57k7h7pk ; turn the crap sound off ; if you can't see the digit-mashing potential, I don't want to work with you). But industry "best practice" has been to use a hydraulic system called an "iron roughneck" for over 20 years now (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j8Vy-Hoe64o). But these rinky-dinky little Mom'n'Pop rigs that they keep on filming
What's the difference between the two? Next time you're shaking hands with a driller or toolpusher and you notice that he's missing several joints off one finger, or even several fingers
When a company tells you that "Safety Takes Overall Priority", you know that they're lieing. Your only task is to find out at how high a level they're lieing, and whether you're willing to work at that level of risk. (Me, I include the helicopter to work in my calculations, and they scare the shit out of me. But I carry on in the job, because despite the prospect of being in an upside down helicopter with the frigid water running down my nose, I'm actually fairly confident of my abilities to survive in such conditions. About 50% of recruits move on to a lower-risk occupation though.)
FTFY