Honestly if it is I couldn't care. People are using vapers as an excuse to continue to "smoke". It is a bad habit period so if what people are claiming to be a "safe alternative" is no longer safe. Maybe people will stop using it as a excuse to not stop smoking.
Vaping supposedly is safer for others, meaning no second hand smoke. I've also heard that it's easier to overdose on nicotine using e-cigs. If someone absolutely must have nicotine, I prefer a means which doesn't impact me.
Just curious - do you drink alcohol? Or caffeine? If so, do you define "recreational" drugs as "any drugs other than the ones I use"?
I don't drink alcohol, coffee, or tea. I don't smoke. I'm not adverse to caffeine (I enjoy chocolate and the occasional cola), but don't consume energy drinks. I don't care what others consume as long as it doesn't put others (myself included) at risk.
Watered down CS classes is exactly what most people need.
My university kind of did that, but not just for computers. We had several IS classes geared towards teaching people how to use computers in their non-computer-related job (how to use MS Word, how to use Outlook, how to use Internet Explorer, etc). Then there were real IS classes for IS majors and CS classes geared towards CS majors.
The problem is that the current watered down classes in high school arose from a desire to remedy male dominance in CS jobs. People who thrive in these watered down classes have a rude awakening on applying for a job (they rarely lack the skills required in the real world, plus the real world isn't also so polite).
As with use of CRISPR tech, this is our first nibbling at the edges of a technology that will involve a host of delicate ethical choices as applications emerge. But the easiest of these ethical questions to resolve in favor of "go for it" is surely having farm animals grow human organs for transplantation. Even vegetarians would be mostly in favor of such a lifesaving application - or to put it another way, those who oppose it would quickly select themselves out of the population.
A pig could be engineered to grow, not just a human kidney, but your kidney, cloned from your body. No more having to spend the rest of your life on anti-rejection drugs, risking death with every sniffle and paper cut.
Read the book Chromosome 6 by Robin Cook. Very interesting take on what it means to be human (or a lesser animal).
It could be highly useful in future medical research, and the damage it could cause if it gets back into the wild would be minimal.
You're forgetting the anti-vaccers. There's a growing number of parents who don't vaccine their kids over fears of autism. Even if smallpox doesn't exist in the wild we need to protect ourselves and our children against an eventual outbreak.
Republicans don't trust anyone that doesn't splash themselves with Holy Ghost water.
Mitt Romney belongs to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The LDS Church does not make use of "holy water"; instead when our elders give blessings we anoint with consecrated olive oil.
Plus the whole cannibalism thing. They eat bread that they lie and claim is human flesh. They are so violent. Imagine forcing children to be cannibals and telling them you're going to burn them if they refuse to be cannibals b
Hyperbole much? Get your denominations right. While Catholicism believes the bread and wine are transformed into the body and blood of Christ, most denominations don't believe in transmogrification. Mitt Romney belongs to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. We believe the bread and water of the Lord's supper are emblems of the Lord's Atonement.
Speaking religiously, the Scriptures tell us that God formed the physical body of Adam, then put in him the breath of life (often interpreted as spirit). Upon receiving the breath of life, Adam became a "living soul."
Doesn't it bother you to know that Adam is myth? Humans are primates and come from common ancestors of other living primates. Or do you throw all the way and cling to a myth? Just curious.
In a word, no. It doesn't bother me if Adam and Eve are a myth or historic figures. I believe that God speaks to man in a way that man understands at the time. Likewise, science is man's best guess based on current evidence. Religion, when perfectly revealed and understood SHOULD NOT conflict with perfectly understood science. Both science and religion are a "what we know / understand now" deal. Either could be refined as more is revealed / discovered.
The percentage of "Choicers" who punt it to nine months is so vanishing small it's not worth talking about. Most reasonable and rational people who believe in choice thats like 99.9999% of them put the end of "choice" where the foetus is able to survive independently of the mother.
With incubators and such, even extremely premature babies (1 pound birth weight!) have survived. At the other extreme, infants and toddlers can't survive on their own for years after delivery from mom.
I believe in both science and God. I believe that all mankind has agency to choose for themselves, so I am against any governmental theocracy or arbitrary laws enforcing a religious set of rules. People should be free to do what they want as long as it doesn't infringe on the rights of others. That means that even though I don't drink coffee for religious reasons, I would oppose a law forbidding the sale (or consumption) of coffee. I also don't drink alcohol for religious purposes, but I strongly support laws outlawing drunk driving since it puts others at risk.
The crux of the issue at hand is when a group of cells becomes a person, and thus gets rights. Killing a pregnant woman is often prosecuted as double homicide, implying that such states consider the fetus a person. However, abortion isn't treated as murder or homicide, meaning the fetus is considered part of the mother's body.
Speaking religiously, the Scriptures tell us that God formed the physical body of Adam, then put in him the breath of life (often interpreted as spirit). Upon receiving the breath of life, Adam became a "living soul." Since it is impossible to know when the spirit enters the physical body, my sect forbids induced abortion at any point (except extreme situations, such as the result of rape). Spontaneous abortion (often called a miscarriage) is out of our hands, so carries no religious consequences. Of course, this only applies to those of my sect (as well as it should).
You make a good point. I work in Massachusetts, live Rhode Island and have relatives in North Carolina and Texas. So there have been times where I've been in my office, logged on to Amazon and made a purchase to be shipped to NC or TX. I get charged the RI sales tax. Wait - how does that work?
It's because some database has your IP address (incorrectly) mapped to Rhode Island. I live in Utah, but my IP shows me in Georgia.
Why do I believe that online merchants shouldn't collect use tax for buyers of different locales? Taxes are complicated.
I assume you don't pay any personal income taxes then, right?
Of course I pay personal income taxes. However, my employer only needs to know which state I call home and the number of deductions I declare and withholds income tax / social security, etc, for me. It is up to me to verify that the right amount of tax gets paid once per year.
The company I work at sells a Point of Sale system we've developed. Sales tax is easily the most complicated module (we even had to include verification for individuals with tax exempt status).
Most states (and many counties and cities) have a sales tax for things sold within their borders. Many have a use tax for things to be consumed / used within their borders which were not purchased there. The seller is responsible for collecting sales tax, while the individual is legally obligated to pay the use tax (generally on state income tax return forms).
Why do I believe that online merchants shouldn't collect use tax for buyers of different locales? Taxes are complicated. One needs to know the exact address in many cases (different cities within the same zip code code have different / additional taxes!). This would force most online merchants to use a 3rd party system for calculating taxes. Place of purchase isn't always place of use. Just because I live in Utah doesn't mean I will use the goods in Utah. I may ship the goods to a friend or family member (birthday present?) who lives elsewhere. I may use the good on a road trip to neighboring Nevada which doesn't have sales tax. This may lead to double taxes on the same purchase. I may legally be obligated to pay sales tax in one locale and use tax for another locale for the same purchase! Online merchants are outside the jurisdiction of locales where they don't have a physical presence. New York City can't force Hawaiian Host to collect taxes from New York City residents.
Cost is more than just something to jest at. At our local super market a container of tofu is $3 and only provides 36 grams of protein. I believe its 12g per serving and contains 3 servings. (Pork right now is $3 per pound and provides much more total grams of protein - while surely being less healthy.) I would love to consume more protein from such a source but today, for value added soy, it isn't cost effective. Also consider a half gallon of soy milk, also at $3. Perhaps, if the US food bill (going away) brought milk to the costs the ag lobby was threatening it would rise to, soy milk would be cost competitive to milk but today it is not. Maybe the same could be said for synthetic meat on an open market, but today similar products are not cost effective.
Even if you are eating the low stress free range stuff, it's still likely cheaper than many of the other things that a prissy vegan would end up needing to buy.
Why don't you just come out right and say that you hate vegetarianism for some unknown reason? It's pretty clear that you're not willing to give vegetarians a fair cop even tho it has nothing to do with your life. Vegetarians have been around for all of recorded civilization. It's far from a fad. In those times not everyone had access to kale. Not everyone needs or even wants to shop whole foods. Yes, you have those people who think that they need to follow the same diet as Rich Roll if they're going to be a vegan but those people are morons unless they're really living the lifestyle of an ultra endurance athlete.
I have no beef with people who want to be vegetarians or vegans. I will, however, fight for my right to live as I see fit.
To have a significant effect, it would have to be about as tall as the tallest building on Earth, if not taller. Plus, you'll probably create some unintended effects like lots of dust devils and sandstorms. It's a really awful idea.
Look to the lee of every mountain. Your mountain will rob rainfall from somewhere else. Is that considered an "unintended effect"?
I like this idea for creating ground or processed meat products: hamburgers, brats, chicken strips, chicken nuggets, bacon, jerkey. I don't think we will get to a point where you are lab-growing a pork chop, a steak, or an entire turkey leg.
I think you're getting at a major point I think about: texture. Meat gets its texture from exercise and marbled fat. Meat cells passively grown in a vat will lack definition. Think "pink slime" or meat that's been in the food processor for too long. Probably would make an excellent Swedish meatball, okay burger or sausage, but horrendous steak. I love the flavor of beef liver, but hate the texture due to lack of long muscle fibers.
Would these products be kosher? vegan? Is it still an animal product if it doesn't come from an animal?
In-vitro meat is manufactured by placing existing meat cells in a bath of nutrients causing them to multiply. The new cells will be genetically identical to the original. It will not be vegan nor vegetarian. As for kosher, the Jewish authorities would have to decide.
They have multiple street names wrong in my neighborhood. Whatever they are doing, it's a little bit sloppy.
I live on Maple Drive. About 3 miles away (same city) there is a Maple Loop. Google Maps calls my street Maple Loop Drive. I have lots of fun with home delivery.
That puts most of us in the "in-demand field" and "skilled profession" buckets. That's not to say that the financial and other costs of emigrating are trivial...
The PT can't stay in power forever, can they? From what I've read in papers and social media and heard from familia, I'm a bit surprised Dilma hasn't been impeached.
There is no sole, that's hogwash. There is the nature vs nurture argument. DNA vs how you treat it. Then there are viruses that alter brain chemistry and operation, random mutation. Cloning won't bring back a pet because cloning only focuses on DNA.
Even if you aren't religious, you must admit that soles exist; I bet the shoes you wear even have them. As for soul, I am religious and spiritual. I used a religious term to encompass the non-physical essence of the individual. Identical twins raised in the same household have different personality traits despite identical DNA and near identical nurture.
In any case, my point is that you won't get your pet back; at most you'll get a twin of it.
I feel for those grieving the loss of a pet, but cloning won't bring their pet back. Cloning just creates a genetically identical (except mt-DNA) copy. Remember that individuals come with individual personalities, and even this will diverge based on individual experiences. There is no known way to clone a soul (for lack of a better term).
I put my decade in with the Cub Scouts, wonderful, and then with the Boy Scouts, brutal. Eagle. The day after I made Eagle, after much opposition, I quit.
I was being prepared for Vietnam. Even then, the local "Boy Scouts" was Right-Wing political.
A whole decade with the Cub Scouts? I thought there were only 4 dens (Tiger, Bear, Wolf, Weblos - forgive me if I got them out of order), each lasting a year. Boy Scouts starts at 11 years old and goes through 18 years old (some Explorer programs go to 20 years old). The political leaning of your local troop will vary on your locale. In the USA, 70% of Mormons self identify as Republicans, so an LdS-sponsored troop is likely to be right-leaning.
So decades pass.
A few years back, I was at the local County Fair. There was a "Romney For President" booth, manned, or should I say, boyed, by my old Scout Troop. Cheerful, Patriotic, and now Mormon. (Our old Troop was very loosely RC; for Religious Obligations, we mowed the Church lawns, and did some odd bits of painting here and there. There was one Seminary Brother who helped us out... a genuinely nice, if conflicted, guy. Good with a paintbrush. After his Scouting chores, he went into Astrophysics, and instead of Vietnam, I went into Nuclear Physics...)
The pillars of the Boys Scouts organization are Duty to God, Duty to Country, Duty to Others. Scouts are extremely patriotic. It was wrong for the troop to officially campaign for Romney (endorsing a specific candidate can be grounds for losing tax-exempt status). It would have been more correct to have fliers saying what different candidates stand for and including polling information. I assume that RC in your response stands for Roman Catholic? So, a left-leaning Roman Catholic doesn't agree with generally right-leaning latter-day saints. What a huge surprise!
What you LDS Freaks don't quite understand is that your goal of turning the Boy Scouts into your potential private Paramilitary Army is Old News. It didn't work for Baden-Powell, and it didn't work for Goldwater, and it won't work for You.
LDS freaks? Man, you do have some anger issues. We have as much right to our beliefs as you have for yours. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints wanting a paramilitary army? Boy, are you off! The LdS Church wanted an organization to teach young men how to be responsible and honorable men. The Boy Scouts of America met that requirement over 100 years ago when we became an official sponsor. The discussion regarding openly gay leaders and boys caused us to rethink our position (the other option would to have our own organization), but opted to stick with the BSA for now.
"Also, it was awkward for some boys the first time a female police cadet unzipped her pants while the instructor demonstrated how guns leave residue which can be picked up by black light."
Why a Monster like you is put in a position of Trust of Children, evades me.
But that is the Mormon Church, after all.
Evil, and Insane, and Hungry.
That anecdote of using black light to show residue left by a gun happened when I was in Law Enforcement Explorers back in high school. The troop was run by the Honolulu Police Department. Roughly half the troop was LdS. It was fun shooting an M-16 at the police range. It was a hoot riding along with police officers and operating the police radio. I enjoyed doing crowd control at the Carol Kai International Bed Race.
You have shown yourself to be blinded with rage against the LdS Church. You are incapable of rational discussion or debate, resorting to ad hominem attacks.
I'm one of two scout leaders for the 11-year-olds in an LdS sponsored troop. Most of my own scouting experience was with LdS sponsored troops. This was kind of interesting with the Law Enforcement Explorer troop, as some participants were over 18 and smoked. Also, it was awkward for some boys the first time a female police cadet unzipped her pants while the instructor demonstrated how guns leave residue which can be picked up by black light.
Kind of...
The acceptance of openly gay members is left to each council to decide themselves, many of which have not. One of the major problems is the fact that the Boy Scouts is a religious organization and a large number of troops meet in churches. If they allow gay members they would need to find a new meeting place.
The Boy Scouts of America is not a religious organization per se. Scouts do promise to "do [their] best to do [their] duty to God and [their] Country", but which god is left to each scout. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the largest private supporter of the BSA (followed by the Catholic Church). The LdS sponsored troops do allow gay scouts to join, but leaders must meet the sect's definition of "morally straight" (indeed, being a scout leader is considered a Church calling, and the position is ratified by the congregation). The LdS Church almost abandoned the BSA when the BSA changed its policies to allow openly gay scout leaders. The BSA's stance protects itself from lawsuits, but opens up councils and local units.
Oddly enough, some Scout councils also allow girls to join...
The Explorer program is designed to be open to both young men and young women. My Law Enforcement Explorer troop was 20% female.
Slashdot Mirror
Honestly if it is I couldn't care. People are using vapers as an excuse to continue to "smoke". It is a bad habit period so if what people are claiming to be a "safe alternative" is no longer safe. Maybe people will stop using it as a excuse to not stop smoking.
Vaping supposedly is safer for others, meaning no second hand smoke. I've also heard that it's easier to overdose on nicotine using e-cigs. If someone absolutely must have nicotine, I prefer a means which doesn't impact me.
Just curious - do you drink alcohol? Or caffeine? If so, do you define "recreational" drugs as "any drugs other than the ones I use"?
I don't drink alcohol, coffee, or tea. I don't smoke. I'm not adverse to caffeine (I enjoy chocolate and the occasional cola), but don't consume energy drinks. I don't care what others consume as long as it doesn't put others (myself included) at risk.
Watered down CS classes is exactly what most people need.
My university kind of did that, but not just for computers. We had several IS classes geared towards teaching people how to use computers in their non-computer-related job (how to use MS Word, how to use Outlook, how to use Internet Explorer, etc). Then there were real IS classes for IS majors and CS classes geared towards CS majors.
The problem is that the current watered down classes in high school arose from a desire to remedy male dominance in CS jobs. People who thrive in these watered down classes have a rude awakening on applying for a job (they rarely lack the skills required in the real world, plus the real world isn't also so polite).
"I'm absolutely against it for organ harvesting!"
As with use of CRISPR tech, this is our first nibbling at the edges of a technology that will involve a host of delicate ethical choices as applications emerge. But the easiest of these ethical questions to resolve in favor of "go for it" is surely having farm animals grow human organs for transplantation. Even vegetarians would be mostly in favor of such a lifesaving application - or to put it another way, those who oppose it would quickly select themselves out of the population.
A pig could be engineered to grow, not just a human kidney, but your kidney, cloned from your body. No more having to spend the rest of your life on anti-rejection drugs, risking death with every sniffle and paper cut.
Read the book Chromosome 6 by Robin Cook. Very interesting take on what it means to be human (or a lesser animal).
It could be highly useful in future medical research, and the damage it could cause if it gets back into the wild would be minimal.
You're forgetting the anti-vaccers. There's a growing number of parents who don't vaccine their kids over fears of autism. Even if smallpox doesn't exist in the wild we need to protect ourselves and our children against an eventual outbreak.
Republicans don't trust anyone that doesn't splash themselves with Holy Ghost water.
Mitt Romney belongs to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The LDS Church does not make use of "holy water"; instead when our elders give blessings we anoint with consecrated olive oil.
Plus the whole cannibalism thing. They eat bread that they lie and claim is human flesh. They are so violent. Imagine forcing children to be cannibals and telling them you're going to burn them if they refuse to be cannibals b
Hyperbole much? Get your denominations right. While Catholicism believes the bread and wine are transformed into the body and blood of Christ, most denominations don't believe in transmogrification. Mitt Romney belongs to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. We believe the bread and water of the Lord's supper are emblems of the Lord's Atonement.
Speaking religiously, the Scriptures tell us that God formed the physical body of Adam, then put in him the breath of life (often interpreted as spirit). Upon receiving the breath of life, Adam became a "living soul."
Doesn't it bother you to know that Adam is myth? Humans are primates and come from common ancestors of other living primates. Or do you throw all the way and cling to a myth? Just curious.
In a word, no. It doesn't bother me if Adam and Eve are a myth or historic figures. I believe that God speaks to man in a way that man understands at the time. Likewise, science is man's best guess based on current evidence. Religion, when perfectly revealed and understood SHOULD NOT conflict with perfectly understood science. Both science and religion are a "what we know / understand now" deal. Either could be refined as more is revealed / discovered.
The percentage of "Choicers" who punt it to nine months is so vanishing small it's not worth talking about. Most reasonable and rational people who believe in choice thats like 99.9999% of them put the end of "choice" where the foetus is able to survive independently of the mother.
With incubators and such, even extremely premature babies (1 pound birth weight!) have survived. At the other extreme, infants and toddlers can't survive on their own for years after delivery from mom.
I believe in both science and God. I believe that all mankind has agency to choose for themselves, so I am against any governmental theocracy or arbitrary laws enforcing a religious set of rules. People should be free to do what they want as long as it doesn't infringe on the rights of others. That means that even though I don't drink coffee for religious reasons, I would oppose a law forbidding the sale (or consumption) of coffee. I also don't drink alcohol for religious purposes, but I strongly support laws outlawing drunk driving since it puts others at risk.
The crux of the issue at hand is when a group of cells becomes a person, and thus gets rights. Killing a pregnant woman is often prosecuted as double homicide, implying that such states consider the fetus a person. However, abortion isn't treated as murder or homicide, meaning the fetus is considered part of the mother's body.
Speaking religiously, the Scriptures tell us that God formed the physical body of Adam, then put in him the breath of life (often interpreted as spirit). Upon receiving the breath of life, Adam became a "living soul." Since it is impossible to know when the spirit enters the physical body, my sect forbids induced abortion at any point (except extreme situations, such as the result of rape). Spontaneous abortion (often called a miscarriage) is out of our hands, so carries no religious consequences. Of course, this only applies to those of my sect (as well as it should).
You make a good point. I work in Massachusetts, live Rhode Island and have relatives in North Carolina and Texas. So there have been times where I've been in my office, logged on to Amazon and made a purchase to be shipped to NC or TX. I get charged the RI sales tax. Wait - how does that work?
It's because some database has your IP address (incorrectly) mapped to Rhode Island. I live in Utah, but my IP shows me in Georgia.
Why do I believe that online merchants shouldn't collect use tax for buyers of different locales? Taxes are complicated.
I assume you don't pay any personal income taxes then, right?
Of course I pay personal income taxes. However, my employer only needs to know which state I call home and the number of deductions I declare and withholds income tax / social security, etc, for me. It is up to me to verify that the right amount of tax gets paid once per year.
The company I work at sells a Point of Sale system we've developed. Sales tax is easily the most complicated module (we even had to include verification for individuals with tax exempt status).
Most states (and many counties and cities) have a sales tax for things sold within their borders. Many have a use tax for things to be consumed / used within their borders which were not purchased there. The seller is responsible for collecting sales tax, while the individual is legally obligated to pay the use tax (generally on state income tax return forms).
Why do I believe that online merchants shouldn't collect use tax for buyers of different locales? Taxes are complicated. One needs to know the exact address in many cases (different cities within the same zip code code have different / additional taxes!). This would force most online merchants to use a 3rd party system for calculating taxes. Place of purchase isn't always place of use. Just because I live in Utah doesn't mean I will use the goods in Utah. I may ship the goods to a friend or family member (birthday present?) who lives elsewhere. I may use the good on a road trip to neighboring Nevada which doesn't have sales tax. This may lead to double taxes on the same purchase. I may legally be obligated to pay sales tax in one locale and use tax for another locale for the same purchase! Online merchants are outside the jurisdiction of locales where they don't have a physical presence. New York City can't force Hawaiian Host to collect taxes from New York City residents.
Cost is more than just something to jest at. At our local super market a container of tofu is $3 and only provides 36 grams of protein. I believe its 12g per serving and contains 3 servings. (Pork right now is $3 per pound and provides much more total grams of protein - while surely being less healthy.) I would love to consume more protein from such a source but today, for value added soy, it isn't cost effective. Also consider a half gallon of soy milk, also at $3. Perhaps, if the US food bill (going away) brought milk to the costs the ag lobby was threatening it would rise to, soy milk would be cost competitive to milk but today it is not. Maybe the same could be said for synthetic meat on an open market, but today similar products are not cost effective.
Too much soy wrecks havoc with male hormones.
Even if you are eating the low stress free range stuff, it's still likely cheaper than many of the other things that a prissy vegan would end up needing to buy.
Why don't you just come out right and say that you hate vegetarianism for some unknown reason? It's pretty clear that you're not willing to give vegetarians a fair cop even tho it has nothing to do with your life. Vegetarians have been around for all of recorded civilization. It's far from a fad. In those times not everyone had access to kale. Not everyone needs or even wants to shop whole foods. Yes, you have those people who think that they need to follow the same diet as Rich Roll if they're going to be a vegan but those people are morons unless they're really living the lifestyle of an ultra endurance athlete.
I have no beef with people who want to be vegetarians or vegans. I will, however, fight for my right to live as I see fit.
To have a significant effect, it would have to be about as tall as the tallest building on Earth, if not taller. Plus, you'll probably create some unintended effects like lots of dust devils and sandstorms. It's a really awful idea.
Look to the lee of every mountain. Your mountain will rob rainfall from somewhere else. Is that considered an "unintended effect"?
I like this idea for creating ground or processed meat products: hamburgers, brats, chicken strips, chicken nuggets, bacon, jerkey. I don't think we will get to a point where you are lab-growing a pork chop, a steak, or an entire turkey leg.
I think you're getting at a major point I think about: texture. Meat gets its texture from exercise and marbled fat. Meat cells passively grown in a vat will lack definition. Think "pink slime" or meat that's been in the food processor for too long. Probably would make an excellent Swedish meatball, okay burger or sausage, but horrendous steak. I love the flavor of beef liver, but hate the texture due to lack of long muscle fibers.
Would these products be kosher? vegan? Is it still an animal product if it doesn't come from an animal?
In-vitro meat is manufactured by placing existing meat cells in a bath of nutrients causing them to multiply. The new cells will be genetically identical to the original. It will not be vegan nor vegetarian. As for kosher, the Jewish authorities would have to decide.
I've had bison meat and wasn't that enthralled by it. Seemed a little tough, if I recall.
But that was a while ago, and maybe my memory isn't the best. Do people like it? Enough to have them go extinct over it?
Bison tastes a lot like beef, but a lot leaner. I personally prefer beefalo (bison - cow hybrid).
They have multiple street names wrong in my neighborhood. Whatever they are doing, it's a little bit sloppy.
I live on Maple Drive. About 3 miles away (same city) there is a Maple Loop. Google Maps calls my street Maple Loop Drive. I have lots of fun with home delivery.
That puts most of us in the "in-demand field" and "skilled profession" buckets. That's not to say that the financial and other costs of emigrating are trivial...
The PT can't stay in power forever, can they? From what I've read in papers and social media and heard from familia, I'm a bit surprised Dilma hasn't been impeached.
There is no sole, that's hogwash. There is the nature vs nurture argument. DNA vs how you treat it. Then there are viruses that alter brain chemistry and operation, random mutation. Cloning won't bring back a pet because cloning only focuses on DNA.
Even if you aren't religious, you must admit that soles exist; I bet the shoes you wear even have them. As for soul, I am religious and spiritual. I used a religious term to encompass the non-physical essence of the individual. Identical twins raised in the same household have different personality traits despite identical DNA and near identical nurture.
In any case, my point is that you won't get your pet back; at most you'll get a twin of it.
I feel for those grieving the loss of a pet, but cloning won't bring their pet back. Cloning just creates a genetically identical (except mt-DNA) copy. Remember that individuals come with individual personalities, and even this will diverge based on individual experiences. There is no known way to clone a soul (for lack of a better term).
I like how they found a flaw in the code all vulnerable after a year but yet still pats them on the back.
Any other company would have been crucified and practically insulted.
Yes, the media always has bias.
Besides, no company has cryptographers. There's no point - they just pass it through the OS's built in or prewritten stuff. See OpenSSL or dmcrypt.
We're talking Apple, so they are kind of responsible for the OS, too (even if it's based on BSD).
You are Evil and Insane.
Ad hominem with no supporting evidence.
I put my decade in with the Cub Scouts, wonderful, and then with the Boy Scouts, brutal. Eagle. The day after I made Eagle, after much opposition, I quit. I was being prepared for Vietnam. Even then, the local "Boy Scouts" was Right-Wing political.
A whole decade with the Cub Scouts? I thought there were only 4 dens (Tiger, Bear, Wolf, Weblos - forgive me if I got them out of order), each lasting a year. Boy Scouts starts at 11 years old and goes through 18 years old (some Explorer programs go to 20 years old). The political leaning of your local troop will vary on your locale. In the USA, 70% of Mormons self identify as Republicans, so an LdS-sponsored troop is likely to be right-leaning.
So decades pass.
A few years back, I was at the local County Fair. There was a "Romney For President" booth, manned, or should I say, boyed, by my old Scout Troop. Cheerful, Patriotic, and now Mormon. (Our old Troop was very loosely RC; for Religious Obligations, we mowed the Church lawns, and did some odd bits of painting here and there. There was one Seminary Brother who helped us out... a genuinely nice, if conflicted, guy. Good with a paintbrush. After his Scouting chores, he went into Astrophysics, and instead of Vietnam, I went into Nuclear Physics...)
The pillars of the Boys Scouts organization are Duty to God, Duty to Country, Duty to Others. Scouts are extremely patriotic. It was wrong for the troop to officially campaign for Romney (endorsing a specific candidate can be grounds for losing tax-exempt status). It would have been more correct to have fliers saying what different candidates stand for and including polling information. I assume that RC in your response stands for Roman Catholic? So, a left-leaning Roman Catholic doesn't agree with generally right-leaning latter-day saints. What a huge surprise!
What you LDS Freaks don't quite understand is that your goal of turning the Boy Scouts into your potential private Paramilitary Army is Old News. It didn't work for Baden-Powell, and it didn't work for Goldwater, and it won't work for You.
LDS freaks? Man, you do have some anger issues. We have as much right to our beliefs as you have for yours. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints wanting a paramilitary army? Boy, are you off! The LdS Church wanted an organization to teach young men how to be responsible and honorable men. The Boy Scouts of America met that requirement over 100 years ago when we became an official sponsor. The discussion regarding openly gay leaders and boys caused us to rethink our position (the other option would to have our own organization), but opted to stick with the BSA for now.
"Also, it was awkward for some boys the first time a female police cadet unzipped her pants while the instructor demonstrated how guns leave residue which can be picked up by black light."
Why a Monster like you is put in a position of Trust of Children, evades me. But that is the Mormon Church, after all. Evil, and Insane, and Hungry.
That anecdote of using black light to show residue left by a gun happened when I was in Law Enforcement Explorers back in high school. The troop was run by the Honolulu Police Department. Roughly half the troop was LdS. It was fun shooting an M-16 at the police range. It was a hoot riding along with police officers and operating the police radio. I enjoyed doing crowd control at the Carol Kai International Bed Race.
You have shown yourself to be blinded with rage against the LdS Church. You are incapable of rational discussion or debate, resorting to ad hominem attacks.
I'm one of two scout leaders for the 11-year-olds in an LdS sponsored troop. Most of my own scouting experience was with LdS sponsored troops. This was kind of interesting with the Law Enforcement Explorer troop, as some participants were over 18 and smoked. Also, it was awkward for some boys the first time a female police cadet unzipped her pants while the instructor demonstrated how guns leave residue which can be picked up by black light.
Kind of... The acceptance of openly gay members is left to each council to decide themselves, many of which have not. One of the major problems is the fact that the Boy Scouts is a religious organization and a large number of troops meet in churches. If they allow gay members they would need to find a new meeting place.
The Boy Scouts of America is not a religious organization per se. Scouts do promise to "do [their] best to do [their] duty to God and [their] Country", but which god is left to each scout. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the largest private supporter of the BSA (followed by the Catholic Church). The LdS sponsored troops do allow gay scouts to join, but leaders must meet the sect's definition of "morally straight" (indeed, being a scout leader is considered a Church calling, and the position is ratified by the congregation). The LdS Church almost abandoned the BSA when the BSA changed its policies to allow openly gay scout leaders. The BSA's stance protects itself from lawsuits, but opens up councils and local units.
Oddly enough, some Scout councils also allow girls to join...
The Explorer program is designed to be open to both young men and young women. My Law Enforcement Explorer troop was 20% female.