The human brain is pretty good at interpretting things below a conscious level. I can't recall seeing 'distrust' before...
The internet, or any significantly large network, is usually represented as a cloud on network diagrams. It's somewhat fallen out of use outside of a few technical areas. My bet is this guy heared it being used somewhere and decided to use it as a buzzword.
It would, except that that is just a test, and not a food product.
Also, please provide peer reviewed studies showing that this would be of any concievable danger, even if it were. Of course, you won't do this, because you're a loon, as evidenced by your sig.
You aren't being sceptical. You're blindly accepting the looney rantings of a few pseudoscientific technophobes. If you want to be sceptical, demand peer reviewed studies from these people substantiating their claims.
Everything with a non zero probability is a question of "when, not if", assuming an infinit universe. It's a question of "when, not if" I transsubstantiate through the internet to stab you in the face, but you don't need to wear a mask just yet.
Actually, no, we still produce more than enough to feed the entire world and all the cattle. For fucks sake, some people are trying to use corn as gasoline its so abundant. The real problem is distribution, and the technophobic morons who block the trade of GM crops are a big part of that.
the whole point of GMOs is transgenic splicing. Yes they do splice Fish and rice.
Really. All right, I'll call you on that one. Point out one case of rice with fish genes, or any plant with fish genes seriously considered for use as an agricultural product.
If you cannot, please sit the fuck down, shut the fuck up, and leave the decision to grown ups.
It is an absolute certainty that the genes will get loose. That's what they do, and plants hybridize to the extent that there are biologists who have challenged the validity of the "biological species concept" as a general means of categorization, citing cases where up to 40% of the individuals in a particular lump of foliage are unclassifiable hybrids.
I was going to point out why you're wrong, but I don't really see the point. If you can't figure out for yourself how moronic that statement is, you're beyond any hope.
Yes, GM seeds might be able to grow in marginal areas. But the vast majority of GM foods is grown in the US where there aren't millions starving. Actually, patented GM foods create a problem for farmers in developing countries since they can't keep back part of their harvest as seed for the next growing season. If they can't afford seed corn, they'll starve or have to wait for th UN air drop. I haven't seen Monsanto or anyone put a huge effort into GM plants for the Sahel or the Tibetan desert yet. And, quite frankly, improved irrigation or similar changes to production are probably much more efficient.
And this has nothing to do with GM food, per se. It's an issue with obsolete laws from the dawn of the industrial revolution being stapled onto the modern world. This has more in common with pharmaceuticals (especially AIDS treatments) than it does with agriculture.
GM foods do require stringent testing, but past experience shows that even the most stringent testing can reliably weed out all problems Two examples for failed pharmaceutical testing would be Contagan and Vioxx.
Comparing the testing to pharmaceuticals is absurd. If you can't figure out why you should be ashamed of yourself for making the comparison, do the rest of us a favour and never discuss this topic again.
Three Mile Island and Chernobyl are two examples that even if something is tested to be almost idiot proof, someone will invent a better operator.
This is pure technophobia. Three mile island is a non issue. Even the laughable 'cell phones cause teh cancer' nonsense is of more concern than that. Chernobyl was the result of a dying government, rather than the technology itself.
If you screw up FDA testing for medications, you can just destroy what was produced. With GM foods, you simply can't. Some will escape and multiply.
So? The absolute worst case senario is that a highly specialized pesticide will be somewhat less effective against wild varieties of your particular crop. They aren't going to cross breed with any other plant, and if you think they will, you need to turn the god damned scifi channel off.
More likely, you have a DVD without bonus features and an HD DVD with them, or the reverse. You also might see them putting the pan and scan version on the DVD layer, and the proper version on the HD DVD layer.
You're lucky then. You're also a perfect target for identity theft, so be sure to shred all those unsolicited credit card applications, and never move.
No, that isn't an example of the broken window fallacy, as the total economic production after an act of piracy is not lower than it was before. ie, there's no missing window.
Slashdot Mirror
The human brain is pretty good at interpretting things below a conscious level. I can't recall seeing 'distrust' before...
The internet, or any significantly large network, is usually represented as a cloud on network diagrams. It's somewhat fallen out of use outside of a few technical areas. My bet is this guy heared it being used somewhere and decided to use it as a buzzword.
Mistrust is the proper word. I don't know where you picked up the odd "distrust".
It would, except that that is just a test, and not a food product.
Also, please provide peer reviewed studies showing that this would be of any concievable danger, even if it were. Of course, you won't do this, because you're a loon, as evidenced by your sig.
You aren't being sceptical. You're blindly accepting the looney rantings of a few pseudoscientific technophobes. If you want to be sceptical, demand peer reviewed studies from these people substantiating their claims.
Everything with a non zero probability is a question of "when, not if", assuming an infinit universe. It's a question of "when, not if" I transsubstantiate through the internet to stab you in the face, but you don't need to wear a mask just yet.
It isn't a valid concern. It's just technophobia.
You have an odd disconnect. If people can own things individually, then they must be able to do so by aggregate.
The dead don't "give" anyone anything. Society does get first dibs on everything, though, all stable nations have wealth redistribution of some form.
Actually, no, we still produce more than enough to feed the entire world and all the cattle. For fucks sake, some people are trying to use corn as gasoline its so abundant. The real problem is distribution, and the technophobic morons who block the trade of GM crops are a big part of that.
the whole point of GMOs is transgenic splicing.
Yes they do splice Fish and rice.
Really. All right, I'll call you on that one. Point out one case of rice with fish genes, or any plant with fish genes seriously considered for use as an agricultural product.
If you cannot, please sit the fuck down, shut the fuck up, and leave the decision to grown ups.
It is an absolute certainty that the genes will get loose. That's what they do, and plants hybridize to the extent that there are biologists who have challenged the validity of the "biological species concept" as a general means of categorization, citing cases where up to 40% of the individuals in a particular lump of foliage are unclassifiable hybrids.
I was going to point out why you're wrong, but I don't really see the point. If you can't figure out for yourself how moronic that statement is, you're beyond any hope.
Yes, GM seeds might be able to grow in marginal areas. But the vast majority of GM foods is grown in the US where there aren't millions starving. Actually, patented GM foods create a problem for farmers in developing countries since they can't keep back part of their harvest as seed for the next growing season. If they can't afford seed corn, they'll starve or have to wait for th UN air drop. I haven't seen Monsanto or anyone put a huge effort into GM plants for the Sahel or the Tibetan desert yet. And, quite frankly, improved irrigation or similar changes to production are probably much more efficient.
And this has nothing to do with GM food, per se. It's an issue with obsolete laws from the dawn of the industrial revolution being stapled onto the modern world. This has more in common with pharmaceuticals (especially AIDS treatments) than it does with agriculture.
GM foods do require stringent testing, but past experience shows that even the most stringent testing can reliably weed out all problems Two examples for failed pharmaceutical testing would be Contagan and Vioxx.
Comparing the testing to pharmaceuticals is absurd. If you can't figure out why you should be ashamed of yourself for making the comparison, do the rest of us a favour and never discuss this topic again.
Three Mile Island and Chernobyl are two examples that even if something is tested to be almost idiot proof, someone will invent a better operator.
This is pure technophobia. Three mile island is a non issue. Even the laughable 'cell phones cause teh cancer' nonsense is of more concern than that. Chernobyl was the result of a dying government, rather than the technology itself.
If you screw up FDA testing for medications, you can just destroy what was produced. With GM foods, you simply can't. Some will escape and multiply.
So? The absolute worst case senario is that a highly specialized pesticide will be somewhat less effective against wild varieties of your particular crop. They aren't going to cross breed with any other plant, and if you think they will, you need to turn the god damned scifi channel off.
Your mouth frothing about 'collectivist BS' brought the conversation down to a grade-school level.
Whether you like it or not, all societies are collectivist to one degree or another.
'Society' is just a group of people, so if society cannot own things, no one can.
Products with the code name "Sony" tend to replace standardized formats with obscure proprietary ones.
That is what is known as an 'ad hominem' argument, and is considered a concession of defeat.
No, I don't believe in private property for the dead. That's an absurd notion.
Oh get over it already. All of you have been running around like a little girl with a skinned knee for 5 damned years. Suck it up.
Bluray isn't backwards compatible, so they couldn't do this, regardless of how many layers Sony fit on a disk.
More likely, you have a DVD without bonus features and an HD DVD with them, or the reverse. You also might see them putting the pan and scan version on the DVD layer, and the proper version on the HD DVD layer.
I can't see them matching the installed base that will rumble into place as soon as Sony get their act together.
I don't think there's any danger of that happening.
You're lucky then. You're also a perfect target for identity theft, so be sure to shred all those unsolicited credit card applications, and never move.
No, their posessions simply revert back to the society that produced them.
No, that isn't an example of the broken window fallacy, as the total economic production after an act of piracy is not lower than it was before. ie, there's no missing window.
There is some degree of community in other games, but not in WoW. Unless you consider Chuck Norris jokes community.
If you don't like the 'collectivist BS' that governs our society, you're free to leave. No one is holding you here against your will.