You didn't say healthier. You said better. Doing things that I like is better for me than not doing those things. We're all going to die anyway, so the point is to fill the time you have with pleasure. Coffee is an excellent source of pleasure.
Besides, the research claiming that coffee is unhealthy is at least as dubious as the research claiming that coffee is healthy.
If you are worried about the risks of a single x-ray, I assure you that they are beyond neglible - especially if you compare that risk with the possible wasted utility of an MRI device.
The risk of a single x-ray, multiplied by millions of people is not negligible. And the wasted utility of an MRI device wouldn't be a problem if we built more MRIs to offset the X-rays we should be deprecating.
Such an oil spill could be stopped in a matter of days instead of months, if they were required to drill a relief well simultaneously with the main well. Other countries manage to enforce this simple precaution, but the US government is too beholden to the interests of industry.
Really? A functioning justice system where people can successfully challenge flawed evidence to prove their innocence is a "self-centered goal"? WTF is wrong with you?
Not at all. Just pointing out that alcohol doesn't necessarily impair decision making. I am quite sure that it would have been a terrible idea for Churchill to drive himself.
Complacent assholes like you are what's wrong with this world. You can get outraged over every miscarriage of justice, and you should. If more people did, we'd be able to do something about them. Authoritarian judges like this would fear for their jobs... at the least.
AC upstream was right. You deserve to be falsely convicted of a crime. I will enjoy not getting worked up about that injustice.
What does that have to do with convicting people based on evidence produced by buggy software?
Drunk driving is bad, mmkay? Convicting people based on bad data is far, far worse. Don't let your rage against drunks blind you to a rather extreme disregard for standards of evidence. Someday it could be you who is falsely accused based on an invalid breathalyzer reading.
Buggwhip operators couldn't stop Henry Ford either. Should Henry Ford have been apologetic to them?
The progress of technology has made the artificial scarcity model completely unworkable. Adapt or die is the only reasonable position to take. Trying to stop the forces of history with legislation just makes you backwards.
Because destroying the livelihood of thousands or millions can be expected to destroy the lives of tens or thousands. Crimes on this scale are a bit more than just "property crime".
Yeah, I figured it would be obvious to this crowd. But it's a bit of hyperbole on reflection. I think I can rightly apprehend the confusion of ideas. GP post wants a technical means to determine the intent of a social system.
Slashdot Mirror
You didn't say healthier. You said better. Doing things that I like is better for me than not doing those things. We're all going to die anyway, so the point is to fill the time you have with pleasure. Coffee is an excellent source of pleasure.
Besides, the research claiming that coffee is unhealthy is at least as dubious as the research claiming that coffee is healthy.
If you are worried about the risks of a single x-ray, I assure you that they are beyond neglible - especially if you compare that risk with the possible wasted utility of an MRI device.
The risk of a single x-ray, multiplied by millions of people is not negligible. And the wasted utility of an MRI device wouldn't be a problem if we built more MRIs to offset the X-rays we should be deprecating.
If by 'safe' you mean doesn't put out a harmful amount of RF, I would guess the jury's out on that one
No, RF is well understood. If it's non-ionizing, it's not harmful.
In the long run, this is definitely a strategy that is better for the coffee industry than it is for you.
Unless perhaps, you actually like coffee.
Such an oil spill could be stopped in a matter of days instead of months, if they were required to drill a relief well simultaneously with the main well. Other countries manage to enforce this simple precaution, but the US government is too beholden to the interests of industry.
I hope OP wears leather shoes.
Really? A functioning justice system where people can successfully challenge flawed evidence to prove their innocence is a "self-centered goal"? WTF is wrong with you?
Complete misinformation by someone with a vested interest in abusing your privacy. Disregard entirely.
My apologies. Guess it was the GP who went off topic.
Not at all. Just pointing out that alcohol doesn't necessarily impair decision making. I am quite sure that it would have been a terrible idea for Churchill to drive himself.
Complacent assholes like you are what's wrong with this world. You can get outraged over every miscarriage of justice, and you should. If more people did, we'd be able to do something about them. Authoritarian judges like this would fear for their jobs... at the least.
AC upstream was right. You deserve to be falsely convicted of a crime. I will enjoy not getting worked up about that injustice.
Do you think drunk, or even mildly intoxicated people often make good, or informed decisions?
Two words: Winston Churchill.
Look, I said I don't approve
Then get fucking outraged over this miscarriage of justice.
What does that have to do with convicting people based on evidence produced by buggy software?
Drunk driving is bad, mmkay? Convicting people based on bad data is far, far worse. Don't let your rage against drunks blind you to a rather extreme disregard for standards of evidence. Someday it could be you who is falsely accused based on an invalid breathalyzer reading.
The difference is that it's not "for life" but rather just until the next hearing
Much like copyright is established for a limited time. It's limited until the next extension act.
With Seth McFarlane voicing the quick witted effeminate alcoholic globular cluster.
Buggwhip operators couldn't stop Henry Ford either. Should Henry Ford have been apologetic to them?
The progress of technology has made the artificial scarcity model completely unworkable. Adapt or die is the only reasonable position to take. Trying to stop the forces of history with legislation just makes you backwards.
Because destroying the livelihood of thousands or millions can be expected to destroy the lives of tens or thousands. Crimes on this scale are a bit more than just "property crime".
PCs caught on because clone makers *didn't* charge ridiculous amounts for their hardware and didn't lock in customers with support contracts, etc.
Come on now. It's a nifty device, that's about it.
Yeah, I figured it would be obvious to this crowd. But it's a bit of hyperbole on reflection. I think I can rightly apprehend the confusion of ideas. GP post wants a technical means to determine the intent of a social system.
I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question.
Come and wake me up when they bag some REAL criminals, like the big Russian gangsters robbing SMEs out of hundreds of millions per annum.
Or Lloyd Blankfein or John Corzine.
Fraud, perjury, libel, slander, making false statements.
Becasue we as a society have determined that private enterprise can only exist at our discretion.
That was the 20th century. In the 21st centruy, private enterprise has determined that society can only exist at their discretion.