In sufficiently large quantities, they are poisons. The point here is that a large company whose profits are based largely on the copious use of sugar in its products is about to fire up a campaign to utterly misrepresent and minimize the risk of high amounts of sugar in the diet.
And jesus fucking christ, lots of things are dietary requirements that taking in large amounts can have detrimental effects. Vitamin A is incredibly important, but it, just like sugar, can have very ill effects in high concentrations.
Your problem is that you seem to have an overly simplistic definition of the word "poison", where something in moderate levels is not harmful can thus not be referred to as harmful at all.
It certainly helps Coca Cola's executives, shareholders, and the politicians that Coca Cola buys off. That's just the kind of caring people that you can find in the employ (directly or, um, er, indirectly) by that fine, upstanding company called Coca Cola.
Looks like the AGW pseudo-skeptics are coming out in force to defend the sugar pseudo-skeptics. Perhaps the tobacco pseudo-skeptics can come out and make it a trifecta of sociopathic corporatism at the expense of humanity.
This is nothing more than a pre-emptive strike against the rising war on sugar. The tobacco companies did the same thing for years, despite the science being pretty fucking conclusive since at least the 1950s. But big money buys big influence, and allows companies to essentially peddle poisons for decades.
Yes, calories are required for survival. But there's a helluva lot better source of calories than what amounts to a flavored sugar syrup in a carbonated water solution.
Clearly you don't own any Coca Cola or sugar stocks. If you did, you would know that sugar is totally benign, has no ill effects, and can be consumed in massive, even concentrated quantities in soft drinks with no ill effect whatsoever.
I like it when I discover my neighbor is trying to control my thoughts through my cutlery and I need to do search of ways of dissolving body parts while I'm mixing chloroform.
In some cases that may be true, but in most cases even modern stories are heavily derivative, invoking cultural motifs that go back millennia. That's not to say the works aren't creative, perhaps artistic, and that some level of protection is merited. But when you have commercial interests just making blanket legal demands to remove any video or film with the word "pixel" in the title, you very much have large corporate interests attempting to co-opt, or to put it more bluntly, steal surrounding cultural creations.
In this case, it appears that yet another legal firm is using the the DMCA and online content providers' flawed approach to copyright enforcement in an overly-broad fashion. There should be mechanisms in place to punish Entura for this, because essentially they are committing an act of fraud, and doing exactly what they're claiming the innocent non-copy right violating content producers who happen to use the word "pixels" in a title are doing; namely asserting unlawful ownership.
What precisely does fault have to do with it? Have you missed my entire point, that, when push comes to shove, there are no civilians in Total War. Every single citizen of a belligerent effectively becomes a part of the war machine. I'm not attempting to defend it, but this is the fact of modern general conflicts, and it's the reason we should avoid them at all costs.
Religion, ignoring its own precepts since the beginning of time.
Just ask all those pagan Prussians and Lithuanians during the late Middle Ages who were put to the sword by those fine God-fearing Teutonic Knights how that whole "love thy brother" bit worked out.
Sounds like the kind of opponent Aquaman could deal with, perhaps the only kind of villain Aquaman can defeat, besides Cardboard Box Man, Pizza Delivery Man, and Congress Man.
Pah! This is mere murder. This is COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT. According to Sonny Bono, the Walt Disney group of companies, and the US Congress, it is the most evil thing there is, and must be stamped up utilizing every fucking resource known to humanity. Copyright infringement isn't murder, it's a BILLION FUCKING TRILLION FUCKING KAZILLION TIMES WORSE!
I doubt there were many people in China, Korea or Southeast Asia who cried a lot of tears over the deaths from the US bombing campaign and the two atomic bomb drops.
There was no time for "sinking in". The Japanese government knew that the Allies would accept only unconditional surrender, but they thought they could play for time. Even after the second atomic bomb, there were high ranking elements in the Japanese military who wanted to pursue a suicidal campaign to the death, and attempted to seize the Emperor in an attempted coup before he could formalize the unconditional surrender.
I will repeat, it took to atomic bombs to force Japan to utterly capitulate.
Welcome to Total War, which was largely invented by General Sherman in his March to the Sea, so everyone had lots of time to consider the costs of such a war. Japan spent the 1930s occupying large tracts of China, Korea and Southeast Asia. It enslaved populations, committed horrific atrocities, and then, made common cause with the Axis Powers, and then bombed Pearl Harbor, dragging the still neutral United States into the war and signing its death warrant.
Did Japanese civilians deserve the bombing campaigns and the deaths by the two atomic bombs? In one sense, no. They were civilians, and not combatants. In other another sense, yes, because their government pursued and imperialistic and expansionist policy that harmed millions, and ultimately dragged the most economically powerful nation in the world into a war that Japan really had no hope of winning.
In Total War, there are no such things as civilians. As Churchill pointed out in his History of WWII, in Total War, every aspect of a nation; its economy, its government, its population, become weapons. The entire nation is mobilized in one way or another, and thus all targets become legitimate targets.
It's horrible, it's incredibly unfair, it inevitably leads to devastation, massive casualties and is utterly immoral. The nuclear weapon didn't create Total War, but Hiroshima and Nagasaki demonstrated that, from August 1945 forward, the consequences of Total War would be far far worse.
So the real lesson of Hiroshima and Nagasaki is not to fight Total Wars at all, and, so far as I'm concerned, Fat Man and Little Boy paid the investment in them in spades by making future wide scale general wars largely unthinkable. I cannot imagine the number of casualties that would have come out of the WWIII campaign that was so briefly considered by military strategists in the West and in the USSR against each other. Such a war, fought with the conventional weapons of the day, would have made the Japanese casualties seem like a walk in the park.
The Empire of Japan under the likes of Tojo was evil, its utter destruction and the rebuilding of Japan as a peaceable and democratic state was good, and whether anyone likes it or not, that was only going to come with an unconditional surrender, something not even the Hiroshima bomb produced. Remember, it took two of them to finally convince the Emperor that the war was not only unwinnable, but would lead to the destruction of much of Japan if he allowed his ministers and his armed forces to continue this suicidal campaign of fighting to the death.
The problem being that if the full extent of Japan's crimes in Asia before and during the war were known, people would be Sking why ten bombs weren't dropped.
So awful was Japan's reign over parts of East Asia that seventy years later, a Japanese political leader visiting Yasukuni Shrine can still cause anger and dismay in China and the Koreas.
I'm fairly certain that, if a major government like the UK were to go to PostgreSQL, the maintainers of the project would soon find themselves in court over some nebulous IP claim about how some obscure library uses the same call declarations as Oracle's code.
We're in the age where the big software companies have essentially become robber barons.
Slashdot Mirror
In sufficiently large quantities, they are poisons. The point here is that a large company whose profits are based largely on the copious use of sugar in its products is about to fire up a campaign to utterly misrepresent and minimize the risk of high amounts of sugar in the diet.
And jesus fucking christ, lots of things are dietary requirements that taking in large amounts can have detrimental effects. Vitamin A is incredibly important, but it, just like sugar, can have very ill effects in high concentrations.
Your problem is that you seem to have an overly simplistic definition of the word "poison", where something in moderate levels is not harmful can thus not be referred to as harmful at all.
It certainly helps Coca Cola's executives, shareholders, and the politicians that Coca Cola buys off. That's just the kind of caring people that you can find in the employ (directly or, um, er, indirectly) by that fine, upstanding company called Coca Cola.
Looks like the AGW pseudo-skeptics are coming out in force to defend the sugar pseudo-skeptics. Perhaps the tobacco pseudo-skeptics can come out and make it a trifecta of sociopathic corporatism at the expense of humanity.
This is nothing more than a pre-emptive strike against the rising war on sugar. The tobacco companies did the same thing for years, despite the science being pretty fucking conclusive since at least the 1950s. But big money buys big influence, and allows companies to essentially peddle poisons for decades.
Yes, calories are required for survival. But there's a helluva lot better source of calories than what amounts to a flavored sugar syrup in a carbonated water solution.
Clearly you don't own any Coca Cola or sugar stocks. If you did, you would know that sugar is totally benign, has no ill effects, and can be consumed in massive, even concentrated quantities in soft drinks with no ill effect whatsoever.
Sugar is just like CO2, totally harmless.
There's been a slight increase in the human population since the Neolithic.
He probably wanted something actually based on science, and not anecdotal claims and innuendo.
Shush, don't go intruding about the anti-science paranoia.
I like it when I discover my neighbor is trying to control my thoughts through my cutlery and I need to do search of ways of dissolving body parts while I'm mixing chloroform.
I also hope Windows Server 2016 shares all local WiFi hotspots. That seems a really keen feature with absolutely no downside.
In some cases that may be true, but in most cases even modern stories are heavily derivative, invoking cultural motifs that go back millennia. That's not to say the works aren't creative, perhaps artistic, and that some level of protection is merited. But when you have commercial interests just making blanket legal demands to remove any video or film with the word "pixel" in the title, you very much have large corporate interests attempting to co-opt, or to put it more bluntly, steal surrounding cultural creations.
In this case, it appears that yet another legal firm is using the the DMCA and online content providers' flawed approach to copyright enforcement in an overly-broad fashion. There should be mechanisms in place to punish Entura for this, because essentially they are committing an act of fraud, and doing exactly what they're claiming the innocent non-copy right violating content producers who happen to use the word "pixels" in a title are doing; namely asserting unlawful ownership.
What precisely does fault have to do with it? Have you missed my entire point, that, when push comes to shove, there are no civilians in Total War. Every single citizen of a belligerent effectively becomes a part of the war machine. I'm not attempting to defend it, but this is the fact of modern general conflicts, and it's the reason we should avoid them at all costs.
I'd like to think most Christians would loathe someone like you.
Religion, ignoring its own precepts since the beginning of time.
Just ask all those pagan Prussians and Lithuanians during the late Middle Ages who were put to the sword by those fine God-fearing Teutonic Knights how that whole "love thy brother" bit worked out.
Sounds like the kind of opponent Aquaman could deal with, perhaps the only kind of villain Aquaman can defeat, besides Cardboard Box Man, Pizza Delivery Man, and Congress Man.
Pah! This is mere murder. This is COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT. According to Sonny Bono, the Walt Disney group of companies, and the US Congress, it is the most evil thing there is, and must be stamped up utilizing every fucking resource known to humanity. Copyright infringement isn't murder, it's a BILLION FUCKING TRILLION FUCKING KAZILLION TIMES WORSE!
I doubt there were many people in China, Korea or Southeast Asia who cried a lot of tears over the deaths from the US bombing campaign and the two atomic bomb drops.
There was no time for "sinking in". The Japanese government knew that the Allies would accept only unconditional surrender, but they thought they could play for time. Even after the second atomic bomb, there were high ranking elements in the Japanese military who wanted to pursue a suicidal campaign to the death, and attempted to seize the Emperor in an attempted coup before he could formalize the unconditional surrender.
I will repeat, it took to atomic bombs to force Japan to utterly capitulate.
Welcome to Total War, which was largely invented by General Sherman in his March to the Sea, so everyone had lots of time to consider the costs of such a war. Japan spent the 1930s occupying large tracts of China, Korea and Southeast Asia. It enslaved populations, committed horrific atrocities, and then, made common cause with the Axis Powers, and then bombed Pearl Harbor, dragging the still neutral United States into the war and signing its death warrant.
Did Japanese civilians deserve the bombing campaigns and the deaths by the two atomic bombs? In one sense, no. They were civilians, and not combatants. In other another sense, yes, because their government pursued and imperialistic and expansionist policy that harmed millions, and ultimately dragged the most economically powerful nation in the world into a war that Japan really had no hope of winning.
In Total War, there are no such things as civilians. As Churchill pointed out in his History of WWII, in Total War, every aspect of a nation; its economy, its government, its population, become weapons. The entire nation is mobilized in one way or another, and thus all targets become legitimate targets.
It's horrible, it's incredibly unfair, it inevitably leads to devastation, massive casualties and is utterly immoral. The nuclear weapon didn't create Total War, but Hiroshima and Nagasaki demonstrated that, from August 1945 forward, the consequences of Total War would be far far worse.
So the real lesson of Hiroshima and Nagasaki is not to fight Total Wars at all, and, so far as I'm concerned, Fat Man and Little Boy paid the investment in them in spades by making future wide scale general wars largely unthinkable. I cannot imagine the number of casualties that would have come out of the WWIII campaign that was so briefly considered by military strategists in the West and in the USSR against each other. Such a war, fought with the conventional weapons of the day, would have made the Japanese casualties seem like a walk in the park.
The Empire of Japan under the likes of Tojo was evil, its utter destruction and the rebuilding of Japan as a peaceable and democratic state was good, and whether anyone likes it or not, that was only going to come with an unconditional surrender, something not even the Hiroshima bomb produced. Remember, it took two of them to finally convince the Emperor that the war was not only unwinnable, but would lead to the destruction of much of Japan if he allowed his ministers and his armed forces to continue this suicidal campaign of fighting to the death.
The problem being that if the full extent of Japan's crimes in Asia before and during the war were known, people would be Sking why ten bombs weren't dropped.
So awful was Japan's reign over parts of East Asia that seventy years later, a Japanese political leader visiting Yasukuni Shrine can still cause anger and dismay in China and the Koreas.
It took two nuclear weapons to convince Japan to surrender. This idea that it was some sort of victim is revisionism pure and simple.
I wasn't aware they were either.
I'm fairly certain that, if a major government like the UK were to go to PostgreSQL, the maintainers of the project would soon find themselves in court over some nebulous IP claim about how some obscure library uses the same call declarations as Oracle's code.
We're in the age where the big software companies have essentially become robber barons.
If the robot cabs are given laser beams and missile launchers they will. Boy will they ever.
"HitchBot 2 - HitchBot's Back, And He's Pissed!!!!!" (not suitable for all audiences, extreme violence and some robot nudity)
I keep the bodies for the Nativity display at Christmas.