Listening to the clip, it sounded like the police officer thought making the annoying kid stop photographing would be as simple as telling him to stop, because police are the authority and everyone should just do what they say
In the US, its the law. Its called, failure to comply with a lawful order. It basically empowers police to arrest anyone for anything. If they tell you to do something and you don't, even if its within your legal right to not follow it, you can be legally arrested. And guess what, this law is abused on a daily basis in the US.
There are literally dozens of other laws as such. Basically the law says they have ultimate authority over you. Period. End of discussion. They are taught they are your overseer and they are smarter than you at everything. Its no wonder they walk around with chips on their shoulders - because their training purposely places it there.
In this case, though, you had a photographer that sounded like a total prat, ranting on about his rights
I saw a similar comment on the video. All I can say is, that's very much a "sheeple" response. If someone asking reasonable questions and wishing to protect and assert their rights while being harassed by police is a "prat", there is a serious disconnection here.
It is part of their job to interpret the law since you have to interpret it to apply it,
You're right. It is their job. The problem is, in the US, it has become their mantra to say its NOT their job to interpret the law, that's a judge's job. As such, they arrest and harass for anything and everything. And this is done because that's the PD's policy.
You see, the more people you can get into the system, the easier it is to track and control the public. If the public fears the PD for anything and everything, the public effectively becomes steeple; and that's the intent.
I find it ironic that the article claims the police made "a costly" mistake, because this huge multimillion dollar organization was fined 3,500 pounds. And no police officers were fired, jailed, or otherwise punished. In the mean time a chilling effect has been felt by photographers everywhere because they know they can get harassed by police officers anytime and anywhere; and have to spend time and money and energy filing a complaint and going to court with a good possibility that they will lose the case unless somebody happens to have HIDDEN camera evidence.
At least it hasn't reached US levels yet. In the US police commonly murder, destroy evidence, manufacturer evidence, steal, destroy property, illegally detain, falsely arrest, sexually assault, gang rape, so on and so on, and are almost never prosecuted or punished; unless you consider paid leave punishment.
I'm sure some moderator can't wait to troll moderate because they are ignorant of the world around them. Or, perhaps they never pick up a news paper. The reality is, in the US, police have steadily been changing from police organizations to paramilitary units. They are equipped as such. Even worse, most actually do consider themselves above the law and the general public's overseer. Accordingly, they have been working hard to disarm the public and to portray those who understand the Constitution as nut jobs; especially those to value and understand the second amendment which is designed to prevent this type of criminal abuse.
To support the "war on drugs" is to support murder and crime and to further strip the population of its constitutional rights. The latest round of of criminal empowerment has been the anti-terror laws. Both laws serve no purpose other than to empower criminals, including the police and federal authorities. In the US, the prison system is the fastest growing government service. The prison population is the largest of any industrialized nation and is larger than many small countries. Remember, if you support the "war on drugs", you are directly supporting criminals. Literally, on both sides of the fence.
I realize the context of the article is actually within the UK. I mention all this because I hope people can grasp the state of things and head things off before they become anywhere near as corrupt as things are in the US.
Not very good examples. Lexus is the luxury brand created by Toyota. BMW and Mercedes aren't inherently toys for the rich. They are common cars in Europe.
The Tesla is not an economy car, it's a performance car.
Right. And because its an electric car, it brings "economy" along for the ride. Driving 250 miles on a couple bucks worth of electricity is hardly the typical "gas hog" which one typically associates with the performance class.
and the economy's not looking spectacularly hot right now
While that's true, the people who are at such a price point are largely unaffected by the current state of the economy. In fact, a large number of those people are likely seeing new profits at this time. Last I heard they are still back ordered by several thousand units.
While I too believe they are overvalued, I presume the price reflects what someone else already pointed out; they could be a game changer. This is likely further tempered by the fact they are pushing to enter a mid priced value point as well, which frankly even the big boys don't have. It probably doesn't hurt that they've done what every other established car company around the world said couldn't be done; ignoring the fact that engineers and researchers have been saying for a decade it can.
Next time just say you're dumber than a bag of hammers and you have no fucking clue how to use Google. Its trivial to literally get over 3.5M hits on the subject. The fact that 3.5M hits isn't enough to start your search validates you're a complete fucking idiot.
Furthermore, as if it weren't wrong enough already, Socrates was not executed for heresy but for corruption of youth.
He was not executed. He committed suicide. He had the option of exile or execution. Government leaders hoped he would accept exile. Rather than accept either option, he drank hemlock with his students as his final rebellious act. Regardless, he was not executed.
Is Google really that hard to use? Its a historical fact. Period. Bluntly, such statements make you sound like an absolute idiot. The bible doesn't mention the Spanish Inquisition or the Crusades either - by your logic, since I didn't provide a link, they didn't happen either? In both cases, the bible is very clearly against those too - but they DID happen. Period.
Corruption of the church has existed as long as the church itself. Hell, even Jesus was railing against the corruption. If you've not been taught that, you've not been taught any truth about the Catholic Church.
Now then, to clarify, the church didn't actually own the brothel. They did, however, commonly send people to the brothel and it was not uncommon for a priest to hear and your forgive your sin in the brothel, in exchange for your cash donation. It was believed that basically running a brothel allowed men to resist other temptations and it promoted a healthy family life. Likewise, priests were also some of the brothel's best customers; which is one of the reasons pedophilia was exceedingly rare. Which is to say they were both pimp and john and they did indirectly directly profit from it. And if I recall correctly, referral kickbacks were not uncommon either. So to say they "ran" it isn't entirely true, but its hardly a misrepresentation either.
Jesus had some pretty damning things to say about adultery.
Yes he did. Then again, not all of what Jesus had to say is even in the bible. Regardless, out one side of the bible mouth is condemnation. Out the other side is all but endorsement. Sleeping with your daughter in law in okay so long as it results in a child? And yet its in there to be read.
Next you want to deny the Catholic Church assisted the Nazis? Because of their assistance, the Nazi WWII effort was able to continue, based on some estimations, anywhere from 9-18 months longer than would have otherwise been possible. The simple fact remains, the Catholic Church has almost endless blood on its hands and corruption is the order of the day. For people to be the least bit shocked about these types of facts is to say they are completely ignorant of the religion's history.
People need an outlet, and if you don't want to see it you don't have to.
Even the Catholic church used to agree with you. Back when they and their priests ran brothels and it was widely accepted, pedophilia within the church was exceedingly rare. If anything, the church itself has become the poster child of what happens when you condemn and outlaw a species' natural, biological imperative; which is in fact, contrary to their own bible's teachings.
In short, any religion which is actively preventing consensual sex or marriage of their leaders is actively endorsing deviant sexual behavior; regardless of however much they may cry foul as such accusations.
Are you that anti-female that you are calling for their abuse of a massive scale?
Yes, that's exactly what they want. That's also why prostitution is outlawed, despite the fact that globally, where its legalized and regulated women are treated much, much better, and often remains healthy, ensure they receive fair compensation, becomes a tax base, and johns bring home far, far fewer diseases, if any.
Treating consensual sex as a crime, is in itself a crime against biology. Sociologically it has an endless list of associated crimes, deviant behaviors, and medical issues which everyone then pretends doesn't exist. This directly translates into oppression and victimization of women and children; which is extremely ironic in the end, given that its largely those who fight to stop victimization of women and children who are largely responsible for creating it.
If you read the article, Kagen seems to think that the Government should have the power to outlaw the production of pornography altogether. Significantly more troubling is the fact that she thinks we need to prohibit "hate speech".
And that's the really scary part. Its reasonable to conclude she doesn't understand the Constitution, doesn't understand why its protected by the Constitution, and likely considers herself to be an authority on the Constitution. Even worse, someone who has these types of views almost always believe themselves to be the absolute authority on how to interpret and apply such views to the world. Basically she considers herself Emperor. Not only is she above the law, she is the law.
No matter how you slice it, she's unfit to live in the US, let alone interpret its laws. The mere fact its the highest and easiest to understand laws of the nation are beyond her comprehension seriously brings into question her most basic level of intelligence. And even if you believe she absolutely understands the Constitution, that paints her in an even darker light as an inescapable conclusion. As that implies she believes she's above the Constitution; which brings us full circle, back to Emperor status. There is no higher power than her as she thinks nothing of sweeping the highest laws of the land aside to bend to her final morale authority. In short, there's no point in having laws because SHE AND ONLY SHE, IS THE LAW.
That's one scary fucking lady! And yet, scarier yet, are those who would nominate her!
Generally, physics hasn't been so far off that something that was thought not to work actually could be made to work.
History is littered with such accounts. Take something as obvious as black holes and the theory of relativity.
The physics of black holes don't have anything to do with any devices that I've heard about.
Go back to the context in which my statement was made. The simple fact is, most people didn't believe black holes could exist. In fact, the math break down rather abruptly which led most to draw the wrong conclusion. Despite physics being very far off, we now know that not only do they exist, they exist all over the place. The universe is littered with them. They are extremely common; despite what the math has to say about it. Its just one of many disconnects from reality physics commonly experiences until we gain yet one more piece of information. The problem is often we don't know what we don't know and so we draw the wrong conclusion when even when the math says its a safe conclusion. History riddled with such cases.
And my wife refuses to watch the loyal dog episode because the cries horribly at the ending. Hell, just humming the song played at the last scene of the episode will make her tear up.
That show has a soul for anyone who cares to look. Its just not pushed down your throat.
Exactly. Now add to that another one or twice on an bogged down Android phone.
Besides, these days a ring heard at the source of origination doesn't actually mean its ringing at the destination. On cells, usually the ringing begins when carrier's switch accepts the call. The difference from that time to locating the cell's tower and issuing the ring, and being detected by the endpoint device, is the delay others are talking about.
Google Voice seems to call numbers in the order they were provided to them. At least in my experience. That means longer delays the lower on the list you go. Meaning, if you didn't provide your cell phone as the first number, which already has extra delays, and doubly so if its a first generation Android device, chances are all the delays add up long enough you will miss calls. Delete all your numbers. Add back your cell phone. Then add the numbers in order you're most likely to be reached.
On first generation Android devices, its not uncommon for the phone itself to add a second or three between the phone receiving a ring and the device actually ringing if you have much in the way of third party applications which react to either rings, loss of network, display turning on, etc. Heck, with the right mix of applications, its entirely easy to consistently miss calls on these first generation phones. Also, some of the ring applications adds LOTS of delay.
I imagine a few of the tornado chasers get decent money for their pictures and so on.
Notice I never said everyone but scientists must leave. Even your own phrase used the word, "few". That's a major clue. When there is enough traffic to completely clog all exit routes, we're either talking about complete idiot or far and away not a "few". And if we're talking about "idiots", negligence won't be an issue to prove in the least. The problem isn't that a few people want to see tornados. The problem is a LOT of people who have no business being there are interfering with the *few* people who do need to be there; be them scientists or professional photographers. That's the problem.
The entire thing about "storm chasing saves lives" is complete bunk to give the PhD's moral authority over the amateur chasers who are in it for the thrill.
All I can say is, "WHOOOSH!"
The entire point of the research is to better improve tornado detection, tracking, and analysis. As well as to better predict when and where they'll pop up. In short, they absolutely DO have moral authority on the scene. That's not to say every trip raises the bar for what science can do, but just the same, the entire purpose for them to be there absolutely establishes morale authority in hopes to further improve things for EVERYONE - including these thrill seeking fuck-tards. If this were not true, there would be no need for continued research. And at this time there exists a need for LOTS of continued research. In short, the fact that a need persists, in of itself, establishes morale authority.
Anyone else who isn't contributing to the scientific body of knowledge has no right or need to be there. Even with established criminal laws, its illegal for them to be there; such that it hinders a scientist's ability to "safely" conduct research. This is called reckless endangerment. Should the worst happen, these idiots are setting themselves up for both criminal and civil prosecution - to wit I sincerely hope the law does so to its fullest extent possible. If you bother to read the provided link, you'll find this fuck-tard behavior of people who don't need to be there are the literal definition of reckless endangerment. So in short, morally and legally they shouldn't be there so long as they are creating these types of hazards for legitimate researchers.
Also - no proper Adblock in Chrome is a dealbreaker for me. Element hiding is insufficient.
As far as I'm concerned, that one item is tantamount to Google actively endorsing fraud. You can bet the ONLY reason why want to do that is so they can bill people for ads they KNOW they never showed. Otherwise, the only logical solution is to implement "Ad Block". Since they are purposely avoiding a real solution which saves bandwidth, cpu, memory, and false billing, the only plausible explanation is a willing intent to commit fraud on a massive scale.
Billing someone for a service which they knowingly did not provide is nothing but fraud. And yet, that's EXACTLY what Google is pushing here; and pushing hard.
That's not surprisingly in the least since Chimps have been shown to like action movies and even porn. Chimps can become physically agitated when watching action movies or even scary movies. They seemingly even understand suspense, which seems to validate a higher level of intelligence. Like humans, chimps react to stimuli such as anger, violence, kindness, and sexuality. In each case, they have shown a propensity for enjoying the content of what is they watch; just as humans do.
Slashdot Mirror
Listening to the clip, it sounded like the police officer thought making the annoying kid stop photographing would be as simple as telling him to stop, because police are the authority and everyone should just do what they say
In the US, its the law. Its called, failure to comply with a lawful order. It basically empowers police to arrest anyone for anything. If they tell you to do something and you don't, even if its within your legal right to not follow it, you can be legally arrested. And guess what, this law is abused on a daily basis in the US.
There are literally dozens of other laws as such. Basically the law says they have ultimate authority over you. Period. End of discussion. They are taught they are your overseer and they are smarter than you at everything. Its no wonder they walk around with chips on their shoulders - because their training purposely places it there.
In this case, though, you had a photographer that sounded like a total prat, ranting on about his rights
I saw a similar comment on the video. All I can say is, that's very much a "sheeple" response. If someone asking reasonable questions and wishing to protect and assert their rights while being harassed by police is a "prat", there is a serious disconnection here.
It is part of their job to interpret the law since you have to interpret it to apply it,
You're right. It is their job. The problem is, in the US, it has become their mantra to say its NOT their job to interpret the law, that's a judge's job. As such, they arrest and harass for anything and everything. And this is done because that's the PD's policy.
You see, the more people you can get into the system, the easier it is to track and control the public. If the public fears the PD for anything and everything, the public effectively becomes steeple; and that's the intent.
I find it ironic that the article claims the police made "a costly" mistake, because this huge multimillion dollar organization was fined 3,500 pounds. And no police officers were fired, jailed, or otherwise punished. In the mean time a chilling effect has been felt by photographers everywhere because they know they can get harassed by police officers anytime and anywhere; and have to spend time and money and energy filing a complaint and going to court with a good possibility that they will lose the case unless somebody happens to have HIDDEN camera evidence.
At least it hasn't reached US levels yet. In the US police commonly murder, destroy evidence, manufacturer evidence, steal, destroy property, illegally detain, falsely arrest, sexually assault, gang rape, so on and so on, and are almost never prosecuted or punished; unless you consider paid leave punishment.
I'm sure some moderator can't wait to troll moderate because they are ignorant of the world around them. Or, perhaps they never pick up a news paper. The reality is, in the US, police have steadily been changing from police organizations to paramilitary units. They are equipped as such. Even worse, most actually do consider themselves above the law and the general public's overseer. Accordingly, they have been working hard to disarm the public and to portray those who understand the Constitution as nut jobs; especially those to value and understand the second amendment which is designed to prevent this type of criminal abuse.
To support the "war on drugs" is to support murder and crime and to further strip the population of its constitutional rights. The latest round of of criminal empowerment has been the anti-terror laws. Both laws serve no purpose other than to empower criminals, including the police and federal authorities. In the US, the prison system is the fastest growing government service. The prison population is the largest of any industrialized nation and is larger than many small countries. Remember, if you support the "war on drugs", you are directly supporting criminals. Literally, on both sides of the fence.
I realize the context of the article is actually within the UK. I mention all this because I hope people can grasp the state of things and head things off before they become anywhere near as corrupt as things are in the US.
Not very good examples. Lexus is the luxury brand created by Toyota. BMW and Mercedes aren't inherently toys for the rich. They are common cars in Europe.
Nothing you said invalidates they are good examples. The simple fact is, they are who Tesla is targeting. They are the price point they will be competing against. As such, they are spot on good examples.
Until Obama installs his kill switch.
Which was already installed and has existed long before his presidency; at least on paper.
Are these cars ever going to be more than toys for the rich or will the technology filter down to the general consumer?
Look at BMW, Mercedes, and Lexus. You have your answer, at least in the near term.
The Tesla is not an economy car, it's a performance car.
Right. And because its an electric car, it brings "economy" along for the ride. Driving 250 miles on a couple bucks worth of electricity is hardly the typical "gas hog" which one typically associates with the performance class.
and the economy's not looking spectacularly hot right now
While that's true, the people who are at such a price point are largely unaffected by the current state of the economy. In fact, a large number of those people are likely seeing new profits at this time. Last I heard they are still back ordered by several thousand units.
While I too believe they are overvalued, I presume the price reflects what someone else already pointed out; they could be a game changer. This is likely further tempered by the fact they are pushing to enter a mid priced value point as well, which frankly even the big boys don't have. It probably doesn't hurt that they've done what every other established car company around the world said couldn't be done; ignoring the fact that engineers and researchers have been saying for a decade it can.
Google turns up nothing
Next time just say you're dumber than a bag of hammers and you have no fucking clue how to use Google. Its trivial to literally get over 3.5M hits on the subject. The fact that 3.5M hits isn't enough to start your search validates you're a complete fucking idiot.
Furthermore, as if it weren't wrong enough already, Socrates was not executed for heresy but for corruption of youth.
He was not executed. He committed suicide. He had the option of exile or execution. Government leaders hoped he would accept exile. Rather than accept either option, he drank hemlock with his students as his final rebellious act. Regardless, he was not executed.
Citation or it didn't happen.
Is Google really that hard to use? Its a historical fact. Period. Bluntly, such statements make you sound like an absolute idiot. The bible doesn't mention the Spanish Inquisition or the Crusades either - by your logic, since I didn't provide a link, they didn't happen either? In both cases, the bible is very clearly against those too - but they DID happen. Period.
Corruption of the church has existed as long as the church itself. Hell, even Jesus was railing against the corruption. If you've not been taught that, you've not been taught any truth about the Catholic Church.
Now then, to clarify, the church didn't actually own the brothel. They did, however, commonly send people to the brothel and it was not uncommon for a priest to hear and your forgive your sin in the brothel, in exchange for your cash donation. It was believed that basically running a brothel allowed men to resist other temptations and it promoted a healthy family life. Likewise, priests were also some of the brothel's best customers; which is one of the reasons pedophilia was exceedingly rare. Which is to say they were both pimp and john and they did indirectly directly profit from it. And if I recall correctly, referral kickbacks were not uncommon either. So to say they "ran" it isn't entirely true, but its hardly a misrepresentation either.
Jesus had some pretty damning things to say about adultery.
Yes he did. Then again, not all of what Jesus had to say is even in the bible. Regardless, out one side of the bible mouth is condemnation. Out the other side is all but endorsement. Sleeping with your daughter in law in okay so long as it results in a child? And yet its in there to be read.
Next you want to deny the Catholic Church assisted the Nazis? Because of their assistance, the Nazi WWII effort was able to continue, based on some estimations, anywhere from 9-18 months longer than would have otherwise been possible. The simple fact remains, the Catholic Church has almost endless blood on its hands and corruption is the order of the day. For people to be the least bit shocked about these types of facts is to say they are completely ignorant of the religion's history.
People need an outlet, and if you don't want to see it you don't have to.
Even the Catholic church used to agree with you. Back when they and their priests ran brothels and it was widely accepted, pedophilia within the church was exceedingly rare. If anything, the church itself has become the poster child of what happens when you condemn and outlaw a species' natural, biological imperative; which is in fact, contrary to their own bible's teachings.
In short, any religion which is actively preventing consensual sex or marriage of their leaders is actively endorsing deviant sexual behavior; regardless of however much they may cry foul as such accusations.
Are you that anti-female that you are calling for their abuse of a massive scale?
Yes, that's exactly what they want. That's also why prostitution is outlawed, despite the fact that globally, where its legalized and regulated women are treated much, much better, and often remains healthy, ensure they receive fair compensation, becomes a tax base, and johns bring home far, far fewer diseases, if any.
Treating consensual sex as a crime, is in itself a crime against biology. Sociologically it has an endless list of associated crimes, deviant behaviors, and medical issues which everyone then pretends doesn't exist. This directly translates into oppression and victimization of women and children; which is extremely ironic in the end, given that its largely those who fight to stop victimization of women and children who are largely responsible for creating it.
If you read the article, Kagen seems to think that the Government should have the power to outlaw the production of pornography altogether. Significantly more troubling is the fact that she thinks we need to prohibit "hate speech".
And that's the really scary part. Its reasonable to conclude she doesn't understand the Constitution, doesn't understand why its protected by the Constitution, and likely considers herself to be an authority on the Constitution. Even worse, someone who has these types of views almost always believe themselves to be the absolute authority on how to interpret and apply such views to the world. Basically she considers herself Emperor. Not only is she above the law, she is the law.
No matter how you slice it, she's unfit to live in the US, let alone interpret its laws. The mere fact its the highest and easiest to understand laws of the nation are beyond her comprehension seriously brings into question her most basic level of intelligence. And even if you believe she absolutely understands the Constitution, that paints her in an even darker light as an inescapable conclusion. As that implies she believes she's above the Constitution; which brings us full circle, back to Emperor status. There is no higher power than her as she thinks nothing of sweeping the highest laws of the land aside to bend to her final morale authority. In short, there's no point in having laws because SHE AND ONLY SHE, IS THE LAW.
That's one scary fucking lady! And yet, scarier yet, are those who would nominate her!
Generally, physics hasn't been so far off that something that was thought not to work actually could be made to work.
History is littered with such accounts. Take something as obvious as black holes and the theory of relativity.
The physics of black holes don't have anything to do with any devices that I've heard about.
Go back to the context in which my statement was made. The simple fact is, most people didn't believe black holes could exist. In fact, the math break down rather abruptly which led most to draw the wrong conclusion. Despite physics being very far off, we now know that not only do they exist, they exist all over the place. The universe is littered with them. They are extremely common; despite what the math has to say about it. Its just one of many disconnects from reality physics commonly experiences until we gain yet one more piece of information. The problem is often we don't know what we don't know and so we draw the wrong conclusion when even when the math says its a safe conclusion. History riddled with such cases.
Generally, physics hasn't been so far off that something that was thought not to work actually could be made to work.
History is littered with such accounts. Take something as obvious as black holes and the theory of relativity.
And my wife refuses to watch the loyal dog episode because the cries horribly at the ending. Hell, just humming the song played at the last scene of the episode will make her tear up.
That show has a soul for anyone who cares to look. Its just not pushed down your throat.
Exactly. Now add to that another one or twice on an bogged down Android phone.
Besides, these days a ring heard at the source of origination doesn't actually mean its ringing at the destination. On cells, usually the ringing begins when carrier's switch accepts the call. The difference from that time to locating the cell's tower and issuing the ring, and being detected by the endpoint device, is the delay others are talking about.
Google Voice seems to call numbers in the order they were provided to them. At least in my experience. That means longer delays the lower on the list you go. Meaning, if you didn't provide your cell phone as the first number, which already has extra delays, and doubly so if its a first generation Android device, chances are all the delays add up long enough you will miss calls. Delete all your numbers. Add back your cell phone. Then add the numbers in order you're most likely to be reached.
On first generation Android devices, its not uncommon for the phone itself to add a second or three between the phone receiving a ring and the device actually ringing if you have much in the way of third party applications which react to either rings, loss of network, display turning on, etc. Heck, with the right mix of applications, its entirely easy to consistently miss calls on these first generation phones. Also, some of the ring applications adds LOTS of delay.
Not good enough.
Actually it is. Legally even.
I imagine a few of the tornado chasers get decent money for their pictures and so on.
Notice I never said everyone but scientists must leave. Even your own phrase used the word, "few". That's a major clue. When there is enough traffic to completely clog all exit routes, we're either talking about complete idiot or far and away not a "few". And if we're talking about "idiots", negligence won't be an issue to prove in the least. The problem isn't that a few people want to see tornados. The problem is a LOT of people who have no business being there are interfering with the *few* people who do need to be there; be them scientists or professional photographers. That's the problem.
One is their job. With that in mind, your point is easily dismissed with the wave of a hand. My original point stand unscratched - in the least. Next.
One is their job. The other is not. Reckless endangerment easily established.
Next.
The entire thing about "storm chasing saves lives" is complete bunk to give the PhD's moral authority over the amateur chasers who are in it for the thrill.
All I can say is, "WHOOOSH!"
The entire point of the research is to better improve tornado detection, tracking, and analysis. As well as to better predict when and where they'll pop up. In short, they absolutely DO have moral authority on the scene. That's not to say every trip raises the bar for what science can do, but just the same, the entire purpose for them to be there absolutely establishes morale authority in hopes to further improve things for EVERYONE - including these thrill seeking fuck-tards. If this were not true, there would be no need for continued research. And at this time there exists a need for LOTS of continued research. In short, the fact that a need persists, in of itself, establishes morale authority.
Anyone else who isn't contributing to the scientific body of knowledge has no right or need to be there. Even with established criminal laws, its illegal for them to be there; such that it hinders a scientist's ability to "safely" conduct research. This is called reckless endangerment. Should the worst happen, these idiots are setting themselves up for both criminal and civil prosecution - to wit I sincerely hope the law does so to its fullest extent possible. If you bother to read the provided link, you'll find this fuck-tard behavior of people who don't need to be there are the literal definition of reckless endangerment. So in short, morally and legally they shouldn't be there so long as they are creating these types of hazards for legitimate researchers.
Also - no proper Adblock in Chrome is a dealbreaker for me. Element hiding is insufficient.
As far as I'm concerned, that one item is tantamount to Google actively endorsing fraud. You can bet the ONLY reason why want to do that is so they can bill people for ads they KNOW they never showed. Otherwise, the only logical solution is to implement "Ad Block". Since they are purposely avoiding a real solution which saves bandwidth, cpu, memory, and false billing, the only plausible explanation is a willing intent to commit fraud on a massive scale.
Billing someone for a service which they knowingly did not provide is nothing but fraud. And yet, that's EXACTLY what Google is pushing here; and pushing hard.
That's not surprisingly in the least since Chimps have been shown to like action movies and even porn. Chimps can become physically agitated when watching action movies or even scary movies. They seemingly even understand suspense, which seems to validate a higher level of intelligence. Like humans, chimps react to stimuli such as anger, violence, kindness, and sexuality. In each case, they have shown a propensity for enjoying the content of what is they watch; just as humans do.