For me, that takeaway was actually a pleasant consequence of the very educational fact that it's way more cost-efficient to start your cross-country wagon trip with 99 boxes of bullets in lieu of "real food" and whatnot.
Really? Last I heard, that isn't a popular thing to do anymore.
And now you've "heard" differently.
What's really changed in the last 5 years is that import/export laws have become more strict, and the regulations are better enforced. This means that just straight-up shipping things back over to China is a much less common practice. But this also drives up the attempts at more hands-on methods of transit such as travelling with said items in your luggage. Random luggage searches still run about the same frequency, so people just run a higher risk of paying taxes on gifts when they return.
This is simply not true. Maybe 10 years ago everybody brought back stuff to import, sure.
It's cute how you've taught your gluteus muscles to manipulate a keyboard.
Go to any outlet mall (from experience: at least three different malls in Norcal and one outside of Chicago), and you will see a line outside of the Coach outlet, dominated entirely by Chinese nationals. They are there to fill aforementioned suitcases. The kicker? The Samsonite suitcases still have the tag on them from the outlet they were just purchased at.
The irony is, Samsung phones aren't marketed as "special" as iPhones, and that's why the Samsung phones are winning.
To elaborate: Any relatively affluent Chinese national who's had the privilege of making a trip to the states and is returning to the motherland will most likely have a top-of-the-line Samsonite suitcase full of Coach purses and brand new unlocked apple iPhone 5's (and maybe a couple of iPads), but how many Samsung products will they be bringing? Likely none.
The reason for this is that when quality is an issue, the Chinese have this adamant belief that anything created in China that is exported to be sold to Americans is, without question, of higher quality than the same item were it sold to Chinese consumers. This includes the same iPhone, made in the same factory, by the same people, the "better" one being shipped overseas.
That's why in the mainland, the spoiled middle-class children (starting at around middle school) with re-imported U.S. iPhones will actually look down on those who are using a "domestic" iPhone.
The fact that Samsung has been a major player in Chinese appliances still helps to set it apart from domestic (to China) brands such as Huawei in terms of overall quality, but because Samsung phones are marketed as largely being a different alternative to Apple phones (in terms of features, screen size, etc.), there's less of a need to re-import that je ne sais quoi from the U.S.
But Apple? Those phones are claiming to be the epitome of fit-and-finish, and that's just shooting themselves in the foot in this case.
They wanted to talk to him about the crash and he said he didn't want to divert attention away from the crash. I'm not even sure what that means.
If you've watched any of what passes for "news" at all today, it's full of talking heads speculating on every possible thing, from the myriad of ways people could have died (ranging from blunt trauma to smoke inhalation because gee fucking golly, the plane carries so many people it must have taken forever to get everyone off and who knows what happens to your lungs in that type of environment!) to just who's fault it could have been that it went down in the first place. And that's all from aerial helicopter footage and an interview with an idiot who used to in some way work with traffic control.
Now can you just imagine what would happen if they got even the slightest tidbit of first-hand information? Oh wait you don't have to, there are half a dozen 5-star "informative" threads on here already discussing just why the plane's wing was or wasn't sheared off while doing some kind of barrel roll a-la Starfox64.
So yeah, when this guy posts as much information as he feels confident doing, including a very uplifting and hopeful picture immediately after the crash showing survivors leaving what looks to be a mostly intact plane, and then doesn't feed the media's desperate attempt to capitalize on the situation any more than they already have been, I am kinda grateful.
CLEMENTE: We certainly have ways in national security investigations to find out exactly what was said in that conversation. It's not necessarily something that the FBI is going to want to present in court, but it may help lead the investigation and/or lead to questioning of her. We certainly can find that out.
Basically, this capability exists, can and does get used, BUT the fruits of which aren't directly presented in the courts, because that would divulge too much as to its existence. Instead, it gets used to get the suspect to admit what might otherwise be unattainable through a normal interrogation.
Now the scary part: This could probably directly provide evidence for not just the Boston Marathon case, but many many other criminal cases in this country right now. For all those other cases though, we risk not convicting a criminal, or worse wrongfully convicting innocent people.
It's kind of sad/scary to think that the FBI effectively has a digital oracle that could provide the information to make many trials look like daytime soap operas.
By the time there's any condensate to wipe off the glass, hasn't the damage (i.e. heat from condensation) already been done? That's what warms the glass and its contents, not the water remaining on the side. So wiping it off won't prevent the warming.
What you said is correct: wiping will not help, as the condensation process is what causes the heating. The most telling bit comes from TFA:
“Probably the most important thing a beer koozie does is not simply insulate the can, but keep condensation from forming on the outside of it,” said Dale Durran, a UW professor of atmospheric sciences.
So either we start seeing stein-shaped koozies at our local dive bar... or nothing will really change from this "finding".
It's an april fools joke where they used the ROT13 "cypher" (replacement cypher where each letter is replaced by a letter 13 increments down the 26-letter english alphabet) on the posts. It's received quite a bit of "backlash" (bitching by people who can't be bothered to click twice to read the original post in english) which may explain why you're seeing this normal summary here.
Interesting comments from both, but I believe you both missed the point. The real question is, which one of these methods, FDTD or FEM-FD, will allow optimal reprocessing in the frequency domain that makes my dinner look prettier with an Instagram vintage filter?
If that is true, I guess the mother nature is far more advanced than I could even imagine. Sonar, ok, infrared sensors, ok, antibiotics, ok, aero/hydro dynamics, ok, but electric field communication, wtf? I thought this domain solely belonged to human race.
If that is true, I guess the mother nature is far more advanced than I could even imagine. Sonar, ok, infrared sensors, ok, antibiotics, ok, aero/hydro dynamics, ok, but electric field communication, wtf? I thought this domain solely belonged to human race.
Haha was the remainder of that post just used to justify your punny subject line? Sharks have actually been using electric fields for quite awhile to hunt various prey. And while I woudln't be surprised if it were true, the summary doesn't really suggest causality or even correlation with the bees, it just says "this number is big, it must be useful for something!". Odd for scientists to do that...
You mean to tell me that such an organized, concerted and government-directed effort by the Chinese to hack other countries on a corporate and national scale is actually BORING?
I can't believe it isn't more of a grass-roots effort with neat 3D graphics and Jolie boobs like in the movie Hackers!!
As great as the 'Egg is, they tend to be overpriced for everyday purchasing.
If you can wait: My best suggestion is to get an account at fatwallet (a coupon/deal aggregator and forums site), and set up a "topic alert" where you get emails sent to you whenever a good deal with a specific keyword (I used "i5" as well as "14" "14.1" for my keywords for my last lappy). Also frequently visit slickdeals as they have a nicer layout and faster response time for sales of limited quantity.
It's usually these deal aggregator sites that pick up the best limited quantity sales of clearances (which will almost always be Win7 nowadays). And this will include anything good from the 'Egg.
If you are lucky Outlets! One of the greatest things about outlets is the option to buy laptops that people have ordered, built, but then cancelled. These are "New" (as opposed to the dented box, or refurbs) on the outlet, and often come hundreds cheaper than buying completely brand new. Outlets also have sales of 20-30+% off that will be picked up by SD and FW.
Of course, finding one of these takes a bit of patience as well as luck, but that's how I got my most recent lappy.
The Mac existed as a "Personal Computer" for several years before it was capable of compiling its own programs but nobody had any trouble calling it a "PC".
We counted Apple IIs and Commodore 64s as PCs. These new systems are far more powerful and capable, why not call them PCs too?
Taking the Apple click-bait out of the equation, this sounds about right from a broad view: Tablets and "smartphones" as PCs from a decade ago or-so in terms of computing power with funny form-factors and interfaces.
To all the apparent fanboys who think that dedicated media consumption devices should be PCs just because they perform better than something from two decades ago, there is one very obvious distinction that you are all blatantly but unintentionally pointing out:
All of these devices were still the cutting edge technology of their time, especially as far as personal productivity and capability was concerned! Sure the very original mac couldn't compile its own code. But it also beat the hell out of a typewriter. And the iPad's A# processors destroy the original Cyrix, 3/486, Pentiums what have you! I'm surprised we even bothered with those processors at all, pfft!
Now crawl out of the reality-distortion fanboy bubble and look at today and what do you see? These devices are far from forefront of doing anything productive, have just good-enough specs for media consumption, and are a pain to use even if you look at the most modest metrics of productivity such as responding (no, not just reading) an email, or working with a spreadsheet.
Yes, personal computers did used mean something. And I believe they still should.
[High court judge] Newey ruled that a copyright infringer cannot be compared to a thief who steals a bag of coins, as submitted by the studios' lawyer. "A copyright infringer is more akin to a trespasser" than to a coin thief, Newey said.
Originally, I thought the judge lost his marbles. Of course it's more akin to stealing something rather than just trespass, they are part of stealing/redistributing a product!
But then I realized how the media conglomerates played the whole DRM thing as effectively leasing you (and only you) the rights to listen to the music you purchased (and only in the media format they presented it!). That sure sounds a bit like charging an admission's fee to experience some wonderful scenery to me (a scenery experience that you obviously can't share with anyone else!). In that respect, it really does seem like NZB(2) did was criminally trespass over this entity of music or what-have-you that we are allowed to take part in (but not take a part of).
Seems like the MPAA screwed their own pooch on this one. I hope this sets a precedence (even if Bri'ish) and people can start owning their music again.
There are quite a few posts talking about how this isn't natural selection. How it's not evolution. How they should have done this with genetic engineering. How everyone who can write a comment would have done it better than these guys. That's very cute.
It's important to keep in mind that natural selection will effectively span the full probability space of all possible traits as far as offspring go, and only the strongest survive.
What that means is twofold:
1. Given that you're trying to study tradeoffs in nature within the same species, you obviously don't want to engineer any combination of traits that wouldn't occur naturally.
2. What the scientists did was exactly what they should have done. They selected traits that could have occurred naturally, but with a small probability. By enhancing these traits, you can then assess how over time and generations the inheritance would play out.
Obviously, the study's scope wasn't as far-reaching as the ultimate evolutionary end-game of guppies (that would require somehow objectively quantifying the increase in survivability due to larger brain size vs. sheer number of offspring), but they do manage to demonstrate a pretty strong dependence (more than correlation, as this was a directly applied change vs. a control) of the compromise in energy expenditures in developing organs.
Yes, if the results were anything other than "common sense", it would be remarkably exciting news that would warrant further study as to the hiding spot of our brainy fish-overlords. But in science, sometimes it's just as difficult (albeit slightly less rewarding) to isolate a fundamental tenet in its most distilled form.
The dimensions of the train wreck that is the Obama space policy are impossible to exaggerate.
The dimensions of hyperbole in that statement are impossible to exaggerate, too. Reading that second link (possibly written by a very bitter pundit-turned-scientist Rove) was an absolute waste of time bemoaning everything from NASA considering too many options before making a decision, to Mitt Romney losing the presidential race. OP's summary was more educational and less biased than that pile.
is it worth being cured of addiction if, losing the addiction, we also lose part of who we are? Is it worth being cured of addiction if, losing the addiction, we also lose part of who we are?
is it worth reading slashdot, if, reading it means reading poorly edited summaries like these? Is it worth reading slashdot, if, reading it means reading poorly edited summaries like these?
Just the opposite, I see it as a test for those who claim to be champions of the freedom of expression.
Champions? It sounds like whoever says the most offensive thing that pisses off the most people is a champion to you, right? In that case, let me be your personal champion and tell you that you are a self-righteous pompous shithead of a moron. Does that make me your champion? You fucking idiot. (How about now?)
As much as I love the quote of how "I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it.", I'm pretty sure we've gone to war and killed people who were more respectful, level-headed and compassionate people that either the WBC or yourself.
So stop being so fucking proud of the worse-case scenario of the first amendment and learn to be less of a jackass.
It's not a testament to how strong the first amendment is, as much as it is a testament to how low humanity can sink during times of tragedy for the sake of attention and feeling mightier-than-thou compared to the next guy. And and by the way you little shit, I'm not just talking about the WBC, this includes you.
Slashdot Mirror
Slightly OT question but TFA mentions that photons are massless particles. I've read that elsewhere, too.
I've also heard that black holes are so massive that the force of gravity does not let anything escape including light.
So, if photons have no mass, how do black holes keep the photons from escaping?
Gravity bends the fabric of space-time itself, which the photons are travelling through.
Here in the US Xiaomi might not roll right off the tongue
I feel oddly compelled to help with the pronunciation of the company name... Anyway, should be:
"shao mee"
not
"ziao me" as many will probably be predisposed towards.
I took away exactly one thing from this game.
Q: Why did buffalo become an endangered species?
A: Because hunting buffalo is fun.
For me, that takeaway was actually a pleasant consequence of the very educational fact that it's way more cost-efficient to start your cross-country wagon trip with 99 boxes of bullets in lieu of "real food" and whatnot.
Really? Last I heard, that isn't a popular thing to do anymore.
And now you've "heard" differently.
What's really changed in the last 5 years is that import/export laws have become more strict, and the regulations are better enforced. This means that just straight-up shipping things back over to China is a much less common practice. But this also drives up the attempts at more hands-on methods of transit such as travelling with said items in your luggage.
Random luggage searches still run about the same frequency, so people just run a higher risk of paying taxes on gifts when they return.
This is simply not true. Maybe 10 years ago everybody brought back stuff to import, sure.
It's cute how you've taught your gluteus muscles to manipulate a keyboard.
Go to any outlet mall (from experience: at least three different malls in Norcal and one outside of Chicago), and you will see a line outside of the Coach outlet, dominated entirely by Chinese nationals. They are there to fill aforementioned suitcases. The kicker? The Samsonite suitcases still have the tag on them from the outlet they were just purchased at.
The irony is, Samsung phones aren't marketed as "special" as iPhones, and that's why the Samsung phones are winning.
To elaborate:
Any relatively affluent Chinese national who's had the privilege of making a trip to the states and is returning to the motherland will most likely have a top-of-the-line Samsonite suitcase full of Coach purses and brand new unlocked apple iPhone 5's (and maybe a couple of iPads), but how many Samsung products will they be bringing? Likely none.
The reason for this is that when quality is an issue, the Chinese have this adamant belief that anything created in China that is exported to be sold to Americans is, without question, of higher quality than the same item were it sold to Chinese consumers. This includes the same iPhone, made in the same factory, by the same people, the "better" one being shipped overseas.
That's why in the mainland, the spoiled middle-class children (starting at around middle school) with re-imported U.S. iPhones will actually look down on those who are using a "domestic" iPhone.
The fact that Samsung has been a major player in Chinese appliances still helps to set it apart from domestic (to China) brands such as Huawei in terms of overall quality, but because Samsung phones are marketed as largely being a different alternative to Apple phones (in terms of features, screen size, etc.), there's less of a need to re-import that je ne sais quoi from the U.S.
But Apple? Those phones are claiming to be the epitome of fit-and-finish, and that's just shooting themselves in the foot in this case.
Then proceeds to teach CNN some manners
They wanted to talk to him about the crash and he said he didn't want to divert attention away from the crash. I'm not even sure what that means.
If you've watched any of what passes for "news" at all today, it's full of talking heads speculating on every possible thing, from the myriad of ways people could have died (ranging from blunt trauma to smoke inhalation because gee fucking golly, the plane carries so many people it must have taken forever to get everyone off and who knows what happens to your lungs in that type of environment!) to just who's fault it could have been that it went down in the first place. And that's all from aerial helicopter footage and an interview with an idiot who used to in some way work with traffic control.
Now can you just imagine what would happen if they got even the slightest tidbit of first-hand information? Oh wait you don't have to, there are half a dozen 5-star "informative" threads on here already discussing just why the plane's wing was or wasn't sheared off while doing some kind of barrel roll a-la Starfox64.
So yeah, when this guy posts as much information as he feels confident doing, including a very uplifting and hopeful picture immediately after the crash showing survivors leaving what looks to be a mostly intact plane, and then doesn't feed the media's desperate attempt to capitalize on the situation any more than they already have been, I am kinda grateful.
Samsun Exec. David Eun survives, posts pic. Then proceeds to teach CNN some manners.
This is probably the most telling bit of it:
CLEMENTE: We certainly have ways in national security investigations to find out exactly what was said in that conversation. It's not necessarily something that the FBI is going to want to present in court, but it may help lead the investigation and/or lead to questioning of her. We certainly can find that out.
Basically, this capability exists, can and does get used, BUT the fruits of which aren't directly presented in the courts, because that would divulge too much as to its existence. Instead, it gets used to get the suspect to admit what might otherwise be unattainable through a normal interrogation.
Now the scary part:
This could probably directly provide evidence for not just the Boston Marathon case, but many many other criminal cases in this country right now. For all those other cases though, we risk not convicting a criminal, or worse wrongfully convicting innocent people.
It's kind of sad/scary to think that the FBI effectively has a digital oracle that could provide the information to make many trials look like daytime soap operas.
By the time there's any condensate to wipe off the glass, hasn't the damage (i.e. heat from condensation) already been done? That's what warms the glass and its contents, not the water remaining on the side. So wiping it off won't prevent the warming.
What you said is correct: wiping will not help, as the condensation process is what causes the heating. The most telling bit comes from TFA:
“Probably the most important thing a beer koozie does is not simply insulate the can, but keep condensation from forming on the outside of it,” said Dale Durran, a UW professor of atmospheric sciences.
So either we start seeing stein-shaped koozies at our local dive bar... or nothing will really change from this "finding".
Bazinga!
now it's rot26. When is this bullshit going to end?
Haha oh man I wish I had mod points right now. Although my favorite cyper is still the wrong-homekeys cypher. I nrbrt noyivr iy unyil I"m fonr yupinh.
It's not every post... but it's nasty.
It's an april fools joke where they used the ROT13 "cypher" (replacement cypher where each letter is replaced by a letter 13 increments down the 26-letter english alphabet) on the posts. It's received quite a bit of "backlash" (bitching by people who can't be bothered to click twice to read the original post in english) which may explain why you're seeing this normal summary here.
Interesting comments from both, but I believe you both missed the point. The real question is, which one of these methods, FDTD or FEM-FD, will allow optimal reprocessing in the frequency domain that makes my dinner look prettier with an Instagram vintage filter?
If that is true, I guess the mother nature is far more advanced than I could even imagine. Sonar, ok, infrared sensors, ok, antibiotics, ok, aero/hydro dynamics, ok, but electric field communication, wtf? I thought this domain solely belonged to human race.
If that is true, I guess the mother nature is far more advanced than I could even imagine. Sonar, ok, infrared sensors, ok, antibiotics, ok, aero/hydro dynamics, ok, but electric field communication, wtf? I thought this domain solely belonged to human race.
Haha was the remainder of that post just used to justify your punny subject line? Sharks have actually been using electric fields for quite awhile to hunt various prey. And while I woudln't be surprised if it were true, the summary doesn't really suggest causality or even correlation with the bees, it just says "this number is big, it must be useful for something!". Odd for scientists to do that...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ampullae_of_Lorenzini
You mean to tell me that such an organized, concerted and government-directed effort by the Chinese to hack other countries on a corporate and national scale is actually BORING?
I can't believe it isn't more of a grass-roots effort with neat 3D graphics and Jolie boobs like in the movie Hackers!!
As great as the 'Egg is, they tend to be overpriced for everyday purchasing.
If you can wait:
My best suggestion is to get an account at fatwallet (a coupon/deal aggregator and forums site), and set up a "topic alert" where you get emails sent to you whenever a good deal with a specific keyword (I used "i5" as well as "14" "14.1" for my keywords for my last lappy). Also frequently visit slickdeals as they have a nicer layout and faster response time for sales of limited quantity.
It's usually these deal aggregator sites that pick up the best limited quantity sales of clearances (which will almost always be Win7 nowadays). And this will include anything good from the 'Egg.
If you are lucky
Outlets! One of the greatest things about outlets is the option to buy laptops that people have ordered, built, but then cancelled. These are "New" (as opposed to the dented box, or refurbs) on the outlet, and often come hundreds cheaper than buying completely brand new.
Outlets also have sales of 20-30+% off that will be picked up by SD and FW.
Of course, finding one of these takes a bit of patience as well as luck, but that's how I got my most recent lappy.
The Mac existed as a "Personal Computer" for several years before it was capable of compiling its own programs but nobody had any trouble calling it a "PC".
We counted Apple IIs and Commodore 64s as PCs. These new systems are far more powerful and capable, why not call them PCs too?
Taking the Apple click-bait out of the equation, this sounds about right from a broad view: Tablets and "smartphones" as PCs from a decade ago or-so in terms of computing power with funny form-factors and interfaces.
To all the apparent fanboys who think that dedicated media consumption devices should be PCs just because they perform better than something from two decades ago, there is one very obvious distinction that you are all blatantly but unintentionally pointing out:
All of these devices were still the cutting edge technology of their time, especially as far as personal productivity and capability was concerned!
Sure the very original mac couldn't compile its own code. But it also beat the hell out of a typewriter.
And the iPad's A# processors destroy the original Cyrix, 3/486, Pentiums what have you! I'm surprised we even bothered with those processors at all, pfft!
Now crawl out of the reality-distortion fanboy bubble and look at today and what do you see? These devices are far from forefront of doing anything productive, have just good-enough specs for media consumption, and are a pain to use even if you look at the most modest metrics of productivity such as responding (no, not just reading) an email, or working with a spreadsheet.
Yes, personal computers did used mean something. And I believe they still should.
From TFA:
[High court judge] Newey ruled that a copyright infringer cannot be compared to a thief who steals a bag of coins, as submitted by the studios' lawyer. "A copyright infringer is more akin to a trespasser" than to a coin thief, Newey said.
Originally, I thought the judge lost his marbles. Of course it's more akin to stealing something rather than just trespass, they are part of stealing/redistributing a product!
But then I realized how the media conglomerates played the whole DRM thing as effectively leasing you (and only you) the rights to listen to the music you purchased (and only in the media format they presented it!). That sure sounds a bit like charging an admission's fee to experience some wonderful scenery to me (a scenery experience that you obviously can't share with anyone else!). In that respect, it really does seem like NZB(2) did was criminally trespass over this entity of music or what-have-you that we are allowed to take part in (but not take a part of).
Seems like the MPAA screwed their own pooch on this one. I hope this sets a precedence (even if Bri'ish) and people can start owning their music again.
The summary reads hilariously reminiscent of this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LkCNJRfSZBU
Same here. In fact, this is what your post looked like to me...
I used to be a voracious reader
I'm also shifting away to YouTube.
I can see all the best bits (in gif form?)
the narcissistic joy draws me in
short attention span? What is it?
There are quite a few posts talking about how this isn't natural selection. How it's not evolution. How they should have done this with genetic engineering. How everyone who can write a comment would have done it better than these guys. That's very cute.
It's important to keep in mind that natural selection will effectively span the full probability space of all possible traits as far as offspring go, and only the strongest survive.
What that means is twofold:
1. Given that you're trying to study tradeoffs in nature within the same species, you obviously don't want to engineer any combination of traits that wouldn't occur naturally.
2. What the scientists did was exactly what they should have done. They selected traits that could have occurred naturally, but with a small probability. By enhancing these traits, you can then assess how over time and generations the inheritance would play out.
Obviously, the study's scope wasn't as far-reaching as the ultimate evolutionary end-game of guppies (that would require somehow objectively quantifying the increase in survivability due to larger brain size vs. sheer number of offspring), but they do manage to demonstrate a pretty strong dependence (more than correlation, as this was a directly applied change vs. a control) of the compromise in energy expenditures in developing organs.
Yes, if the results were anything other than "common sense", it would be remarkably exciting news that would warrant further study as to the hiding spot of our brainy fish-overlords. But in science, sometimes it's just as difficult (albeit slightly less rewarding) to isolate a fundamental tenet in its most distilled form.
From TFA (second link):
The dimensions of the train wreck that is the Obama space policy are impossible to exaggerate.
The dimensions of hyperbole in that statement are impossible to exaggerate, too. Reading that second link (possibly written by a very bitter pundit-turned-scientist Rove) was an absolute waste of time bemoaning everything from NASA considering too many options before making a decision, to Mitt Romney losing the presidential race. OP's summary was more educational and less biased than that pile.
is it worth being cured of addiction if, losing the addiction, we also lose part of who we are? Is it worth being cured of addiction if, losing the addiction, we also lose part of who we are?
is it worth reading slashdot, if, reading it means reading poorly edited summaries like these? Is it worth reading slashdot, if, reading it means reading poorly edited summaries like these?
Just the opposite, I see it as a test for those who claim to be champions of the freedom of expression.
Champions? It sounds like whoever says the most offensive thing that pisses off the most people is a champion to you, right?
In that case, let me be your personal champion and tell you that you are a self-righteous pompous shithead of a moron. Does that make me your champion? You fucking idiot. (How about now?)
As much as I love the quote of how "I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it.", I'm pretty sure we've gone to war and killed people who were more respectful, level-headed and compassionate people that either the WBC or yourself.
So stop being so fucking proud of the worse-case scenario of the first amendment and learn to be less of a jackass.
It's not a testament to how strong the first amendment is, as much as it is a testament to how low humanity can sink during times of tragedy for the sake of attention and feeling mightier-than-thou compared to the next guy. And and by the way you little shit, I'm not just talking about the WBC, this includes you.