"Misinformation" was in reference to the fake cancer treatment example. You seemed to be saying that anything the consumer wanted on the label, they could have. That could include misinformation, or in the case of labeling the technology used -- misleading information.
Now you're just arguing with strawmen and making shit up. I'm out.
So am I understanding you correct that you want to combat food patents by labeling the type of plant production used?
No, come on, that's not what I said. Producers have no problem putting the little "tm" symbol next to every single one of their trademarks, along with the name of the trademark holder, so why the problem labeling the produce with a simple indication that the organism is patented and the name of the owner?
But I'm at least glad that you withdrew your claim that a label would be "misinformation". That's a bogus argument that I see a lot. A true fact cannot be misinformation. Beyond that, it's the job of the producer to do the proper marketing and public relations to convince consumers their product is worth the money, instead of trying to hide this true fact.
I would argue that consumers also needs to be protected from misinformation.
It is not misinformation to label a genetically-modified organism that is protected by intellectual property laws as a genetically-modified organism that is protected by intellectual property laws. Since it is a true fact, it is the very opposite of misinformation. It's quite suspicious that there is so much effort to this one very plain fact.
Well, patents on foodstuff have existed for over a century
No, the first patent of a plant didn't occur until 1931, and it wasn't a basic foodstuff.
If you disagree with the concept of patents then advocate changing patent laws instead of going the roundabout way of labeling specific technologies
No, my way is more effective because it harnesses the power of consumer choice.
It still doesn't matter, because the consumers are paying the bills. They get to decide.
Eventually, you'll put a label on it.
But whether or not e.g. a banana is a hybridized polyploid clone from Chiquita doesn't seem to tell the average consumer much for them to act upon.
Oh, but it does. I don't want to support companies that would patent basic foodstuffs. I don't believe patents should even be allowed for basic foodstuffs. So I can act upon that information by not buying Chiquita bananas.
Yes, if it's protected by intellectual property, it should say so and list the owner of the intellectual property. If the genetically-modified organism is not protected by intellectual property laws or is public domain, and the modification was made in a laboratory by a CRISPR, then a simple marking showing it as GMO will suffice. It could be like those little markings they put on food that is kosher or halal.
I've always felt that it seemed arbitrary and ill-willed to force GMO products to be labeled.
That's too bad. Consumers are paying the bill, and they want a label so they can choose.
Consumers can exist without the GMO companies, but GMO companies cannot exist without consumers. Put a label on it. If your product really has a benefit, then the label will be to the benefit of the company.
Um, yeah, and the story says that oh so urbane NYC-izens thought it was aliens. I wouldn't get too smug over this, lol
You might want to look up the definition of "urbane". If you had ever been to NYC, you would know that it's not a word you would use to describe the occupants of that city, and especially not the occupants of Astoria.
By the way, if you go and search Twitter for #Qanon, you'll find that there are already NYC blue light truthers who are saying this is a message to patriots that the "hot war" is coming and that the acting attorney general (aka "117") is about to unleash holy hell on unbelievers and other liberals. Or, that it's a false flag. I'm not shitting you.
I have no interest in even looking up data on what you're telling me because nothing you're saying refutes my high rent and property value rebuttal
You think $2k a month is high for a 2 bedroom place? That's about what it would cost you in Houston, less than Chicago, much less than New York. Do you think those places only have college-educated people living there?
Rents are on the high end throughout California, and yet, if you read the last line of the summary:
Statewide, workers with a high school diploma have an unemployment rate of 6.2 percent, nearly double the 3.5 percent rate of those with a bachelor's or higher.
High rents don't keep people from working. They don't keep people without college education from working. In my high-rent area on the Central Coast, my neighbor on one side is an auto mechanic and my neighbor across the street is a plumber. Neither has a college degree. Both own their own homes.
You're looking for a reason to say that California sucks for some reason. Here's a news flash: rents are too goddamn high all over the US.
The primary industries of Sonoma County are agriculture and hospitality. You don't need a college degree to clean a room in a bed & breakfast or to bus tables. Emerging industries in Sonoma County are manufacturing craft beverages, specialty foods and outdoor recreation.
Sonoma County is rural. Of course there are more jobs for people without degrees. You don't need that masters in CS degree to pick fucking grapes.
I'm not sure this phenomenon has anything to do with the value of a college education, or the number of H1B visas. It might just be a highly localized issue. Let's keep reading...
Statewide, workers with a high school diploma have an unemployment rate of 6.2 percent, nearly double the 3.5 percent rate of those with a bachelor's or higher.
Meaning if there's a problem, you should be looking at either the regional government or municipal government.
Clean water is a national security issue. Aquifers, rivers, lakes do not respect state or municipal borders. The ecosystem doesn't care about your "Welcome to Indiana" sign.
Ensuring clean water for US citizens is a core function of government. At all levels, but starting from the top. This is enumerated in the U.S. Constitution, in case you care about things like that.
What's rare is clean water that doesn't require secondary purification.
Fortunately, what's NOT rare is the technology required to do a secondary purification on water.
What's rare is the will to stand up to corporations and the understanding in government that supplying clean drinking water to the population should be one of the core functions of government. It's at least as much a core function as foreign wars or building a fucking wall.
I'm more concerned that we've now been conditioned to having to buy water in bottles when it's one of the most abundant substances on Earth. It represents a failure of the imagination and the triumph pf profits-over-people. Corporations pollute available water and then say, "Oh, you can still have clean water, you'll just have to pay us for it by the bottle now, and on top of that, we'll sell it to you in bottles made of petroleum-based substances so you can have even more pollution and need to pay us for even more stuff. #Winning."
I really ended up liking Succession on HBO. Also, My Brilliant Friend.
Altered Carbon was good, and so was the Good Place. The third season of Patriot was also pretty terrific in it's own way, and featured my old Chicago friend, Tony Fitzpatrick in an interesting role.
I have a bit of a problem with Marvelous Ms. Maisel. There is this subtext that runs throughout, usually played for laughs, that career is more important than family and love. I don't know if it's just some kind of pro-capitalist agit-prop or just a perpetuation of the myth that all great people have to suffer and make the people around them miserable in order to succeed. I enjoy the show except for that.
I find this comment amusing when the Democrats have pretty much defiled Democracy with their, "Resist" movement. Democrats LOVE Democracy, until they lose. Then it's, "Eliminate the electoral college!", "Eliminate the Senate!".
Think about what you're saying. The electoral college and the US Senate are some of our least democratic institutions. In fact, they are anti-democratic by design.
Mobs in yellow vests don't generally bring it back to life.
The only way to revive Democracy is to practice it. It's like anything else: if you want to get better at something, you have to practice. We may be on a trend of greater electoral participation in the US, which can only help us. There will still be minorities in power in certain places (Wisconsin, North Carolina, etc) who will try to thwart the will of the people on their way out the door, but they're on their way out the door, which is the important part.
I think some guarded optimism is warranted. Maybe it's just the eggnog, but I choose to look on the bright side.
Slashdot Mirror
I have a few questions:
1) is there surfing in Vermont?
2) will I have to wear socks when I go outside in December?
3) is pot legal?
If you can't answer "yes" to all three of these questions, it's going to take more than $10k to get me to go there.
Now you're just arguing with strawmen and making shit up. I'm out.
No, come on, that's not what I said. Producers have no problem putting the little "tm" symbol next to every single one of their trademarks, along with the name of the trademark holder, so why the problem labeling the produce with a simple indication that the organism is patented and the name of the owner?
But I'm at least glad that you withdrew your claim that a label would be "misinformation". That's a bogus argument that I see a lot. A true fact cannot be misinformation. Beyond that, it's the job of the producer to do the proper marketing and public relations to convince consumers their product is worth the money, instead of trying to hide this true fact.
It is not misinformation to label a genetically-modified organism that is protected by intellectual property laws as a genetically-modified organism that is protected by intellectual property laws. Since it is a true fact, it is the very opposite of misinformation. It's quite suspicious that there is so much effort to this one very plain fact.
No, the first patent of a plant didn't occur until 1931, and it wasn't a basic foodstuff.
No, my way is more effective because it harnesses the power of consumer choice.
There will be labels.
It still doesn't matter, because the consumers are paying the bills. They get to decide.
Eventually, you'll put a label on it.
Oh, but it does. I don't want to support companies that would patent basic foodstuffs. I don't believe patents should even be allowed for basic foodstuffs. So I can act upon that information by not buying Chiquita bananas.
Yes, if it's protected by intellectual property, it should say so and list the owner of the intellectual property. If the genetically-modified organism is not protected by intellectual property laws or is public domain, and the modification was made in a laboratory by a CRISPR, then a simple marking showing it as GMO will suffice. It could be like those little markings they put on food that is kosher or halal.
Is that acceptable to you?
That's too bad. Consumers are paying the bill, and they want a label so they can choose.
Consumers can exist without the GMO companies, but GMO companies cannot exist without consumers. Put a label on it. If your product really has a benefit, then the label will be to the benefit of the company.
This sounds like promising research. If products come to market from it, there should be a label on it.
Both things can be true. If GMO products are developed that show benefit to consumers, they should be sold. With a label. Simple.
Need? You would be surprised how well I can survive without hard cheese or pharmaceutical insulin.
Urban is not the same as urbane.
You might want to look up the definition of "urbane". If you had ever been to NYC, you would know that it's not a word you would use to describe the occupants of that city, and especially not the occupants of Astoria.
Article 1 Section 8.
A friend of mine who lives in Astoria posted a video and it looked like some real Ghostbuster shit.
There's a good roundup of videos of this event over on Deadspin.
https://theconcourse.deadspin....
By the way, if you go and search Twitter for #Qanon, you'll find that there are already NYC blue light truthers who are saying this is a message to patriots that the "hot war" is coming and that the acting attorney general (aka "117") is about to unleash holy hell on unbelievers and other liberals. Or, that it's a false flag. I'm not shitting you.
https://twitter.com/travis_vie...
You think $2k a month is high for a 2 bedroom place? That's about what it would cost you in Houston, less than Chicago, much less than New York. Do you think those places only have college-educated people living there?
Rents are on the high end throughout California, and yet, if you read the last line of the summary:
High rents don't keep people from working. They don't keep people without college education from working. In my high-rent area on the Central Coast, my neighbor on one side is an auto mechanic and my neighbor across the street is a plumber. Neither has a college degree. Both own their own homes.
You're looking for a reason to say that California sucks for some reason. Here's a news flash: rents are too goddamn high all over the US.
The primary industries of Sonoma County are agriculture and hospitality. You don't need a college degree to clean a room in a bed & breakfast or to bus tables. Emerging industries in Sonoma County are manufacturing craft beverages, specialty foods and outdoor recreation.
Sonoma County is rural. Of course there are more jobs for people without degrees. You don't need that masters in CS degree to pick fucking grapes.
I'm not sure this phenomenon has anything to do with the value of a college education, or the number of H1B visas. It might just be a highly localized issue. Let's keep reading...
See what I mean?
Clean water is a national security issue. Aquifers, rivers, lakes do not respect state or municipal borders. The ecosystem doesn't care about your "Welcome to Indiana" sign.
Ensuring clean water for US citizens is a core function of government. At all levels, but starting from the top. This is enumerated in the U.S. Constitution, in case you care about things like that.
Fortunately, what's NOT rare is the technology required to do a secondary purification on water.
What's rare is the will to stand up to corporations and the understanding in government that supplying clean drinking water to the population should be one of the core functions of government. It's at least as much a core function as foreign wars or building a fucking wall.
Yes, this is one of the reasons that there is no animal life on Earth.
I'm more concerned that we've now been conditioned to having to buy water in bottles when it's one of the most abundant substances on Earth. It represents a failure of the imagination and the triumph pf profits-over-people. Corporations pollute available water and then say, "Oh, you can still have clean water, you'll just have to pay us for it by the bottle now, and on top of that, we'll sell it to you in bottles made of petroleum-based substances so you can have even more pollution and need to pay us for even more stuff. #Winning."
I really ended up liking Succession on HBO. Also, My Brilliant Friend.
Altered Carbon was good, and so was the Good Place. The third season of Patriot was also pretty terrific in it's own way, and featured my old Chicago friend, Tony Fitzpatrick in an interesting role.
I have a bit of a problem with Marvelous Ms. Maisel. There is this subtext that runs throughout, usually played for laughs, that career is more important than family and love. I don't know if it's just some kind of pro-capitalist agit-prop or just a perpetuation of the myth that all great people have to suffer and make the people around them miserable in order to succeed. I enjoy the show except for that.
Think about what you're saying. The electoral college and the US Senate are some of our least democratic institutions. In fact, they are anti-democratic by design.
Mobs in yellow vests don't generally bring it back to life.
The only way to revive Democracy is to practice it. It's like anything else: if you want to get better at something, you have to practice. We may be on a trend of greater electoral participation in the US, which can only help us. There will still be minorities in power in certain places (Wisconsin, North Carolina, etc) who will try to thwart the will of the people on their way out the door, but they're on their way out the door, which is the important part.
I think some guarded optimism is warranted. Maybe it's just the eggnog, but I choose to look on the bright side.
Merry Xmas from all of us at Apple.