Really, I didn't think I'd ever see such things in my lifetime. For all the complaining we do, we sure have some insanely cool stuff either already made or in the works.
I'm still trying to wrap my head around "Space Food Sticks".
So basically Trump wants to make tracking databases that are already in use by law enforcement, intelligence agencies, and who knows how many private organizations public. Who isn't in a database nowdays?
Is there a database of rich guys who have repeatedly bilked investors? Whaddya think, Donald?
You have fallen for the . No GMO plant produces sterile seeds. Under the license that every farmer who buys Monsanto GMO seeds signs they are not allowed to plant the next crop by saving the seeds.
That's why I said "supposedly" sterile.
Of course they're not sterile. And yet Monsanto has gone after farmers who plant seeds from their plants. Thus, the abuse of intellectual property laws.
Innovation is so much easier when one has decades of tax-payer funded research to draw upon.
Um, SpaceX has the same "decades of tax-payer funded research to draw upon". And they still haven't been able to do what NASA was doing for over half a century.
History is littered with examples where marketing has triumphed over technical greatness
I'm still mad that the Steve Jobs movie tanked too. Why is no one interested in the greatest mind of the 20th century?
Bill Gates is a "marketing genius" but you never saw Steve Jobs resort to "marketing". did you? He did it all with nothing but pure genius, originality and grit.
From the point of view of consuming the fish, which is what the FDA is interested in, there is no substantive difference.
And what about the corn and soy? How can a company sue a farmer who plants a seed from a supposedly sterile plant which has no substantive difference from a non GMO plant? It's not just "the process" then, is it?
I hope it goes better than the last SpaceX launch.
It's funny isn't it, that NASA's been shuttling people to and from space stations for more than 40 years, but it's supposed to be a big deal because now it's going to be done by "the private sector". And even after almost half a century, the private sector hasn't been able to get it right, and the only reason they're doing it is because government's going to pay for it.
Before we label GMOs, I want sulfites labeled. I have a friend who's seriously allergic to them, and to avoid sending her to the hospital we have to make sure what foods have sulfites and what don't. Typically, we read the entire list of ingredients on the product label, and sometimes guess at what it means.
Note the date and time. David Thornley wants food to be truthfully labeled. I'm glad that you have evolved on this issue.
Fortunately, we live in a republic, not a direct democracy.
I'm not talking about GMOs as a political issue. I'm talking about it as a consumer issue.
And yes, regardless of whether we're a republic or democracy, consumers still control the economy when it comes to consumer products. It has nothing to do with the form of government, it has to do with the economic reality.
Because there is a substantive difference in the _production_method_. Just like you can patent a continuous oven, even if the bread it produces is the same as with a batch oven.
if the difference is only in the "production method" then why are farmers sued for using GMO seeds without a license?
Consumers are paying the bill. Consumers pay every single penny of the money spent on GMO research.
Wrong. Taxpayers spend money on GMO research, too, without ever necessarily buying any of the products that come from that research.
And yet, as another GMO enthusiast stated above, GMOs don't have benefit to consumers, they only benefit the companies that own them. You're OK with this corporate welfare?
Slashdot Mirror
I'm still trying to wrap my head around "Space Food Sticks".
http://www.phaidon.com/resourc...
Being made by SpaceX.
Half a century later.
That wascally wabbit tricked him again!
Is there a database of rich guys who have repeatedly bilked investors? Whaddya think, Donald?
It's time someone asked The Donald what he thinks of systemd.
That's not true, in fact, I belie...Oh look, Jessica Jones is on Netflix!
We'll see. They haven't been able to get anyone anywhere alive yet.
That's why I said "supposedly" sterile.
Of course they're not sterile. And yet Monsanto has gone after farmers who plant seeds from their plants. Thus, the abuse of intellectual property laws.
Um, SpaceX has the same "decades of tax-payer funded research to draw upon". And they still haven't been able to do what NASA was doing for over half a century.
You're having trouble with your eyes because you've watched too many embedded videos.
"Strangle Baby Hitler" is my euphemism for masturbating.
Just putting that out there.
Can I borrow $20 til payday? I'm good for it.
I'm still mad that the Steve Jobs movie tanked too. Why is no one interested in the greatest mind of the 20th century?
Bill Gates is a "marketing genius" but you never saw Steve Jobs resort to "marketing". did you? He did it all with nothing but pure genius, originality and grit.
AND he was the son of a Syrian migrant, so yay.
And what about the corn and soy? How can a company sue a farmer who plants a seed from a supposedly sterile plant which has no substantive difference from a non GMO plant? It's not just "the process" then, is it?
But we need them delivered alive.
Yet you still bought your pet pig. Hmm.
Of course not. No corporation is every responsible for any mess they make.
How can it possibly be anything BUT the result of an organizational process failure of SpaceX as a company?
It's funny isn't it, that NASA's been shuttling people to and from space stations for more than 40 years, but it's supposed to be a big deal because now it's going to be done by "the private sector". And even after almost half a century, the private sector hasn't been able to get it right, and the only reason they're doing it is because government's going to pay for it.
I guess John Galt is kind of a putz after all.
If only there was some way to get a handle on peoples' preferences:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07...
Note the date and time. David Thornley wants food to be truthfully labeled. I'm glad that you have evolved on this issue.
So you believe food prices have gone down thanks to GMOs?
I'm not talking about GMOs as a political issue. I'm talking about it as a consumer issue.
And yes, regardless of whether we're a republic or democracy, consumers still control the economy when it comes to consumer products. It has nothing to do with the form of government, it has to do with the economic reality.
if the difference is only in the "production method" then why are farmers sued for using GMO seeds without a license?
And yet, as another GMO enthusiast stated above, GMOs don't have benefit to consumers, they only benefit the companies that own them. You're OK with this corporate welfare?