What on Earth could make somebody flagrantly disregard instructions and risk jail time just so they could blog on Twitter to all their friends? Why not wait until AFTER the trial? So you were a juror sitting on a trial..... WHO THE FUCK CARES?! WE'VE ALL DONE BEEN THERE!
The judge ought to have beat the idiot to death with his gavel. It would have been a good example of 'Public Service'.
Blockbuster *IS* corrupt. I used to work for them, and know firsthand the slimy tactics used.....
The part that really pissed me off was when I worked 21 days in a row, and was told that I'd be getting overtime for every additional 7 days I worked. Overtime was every seven days: Regular time the first 7 days, then 1.5x the next, then 2x, and so on. The store manager kept calling me in, and told me that I would get overtime on this schedule.
When I went to collect my overtime pay, the DM said "It doesn't matter what you manager told you, we're only gonna pay you what we are required to under CA law", and paid me $111.00 for overtime.
When I called to explain this, the DM got really snotty. I told him I was now in a big financial spot since I had just paid for a brand-new M1A-1 semiautomatic rifle (which was followed by an awkward silence). He than just gave a smarmy reply and said he had to go.
Not only that, they still claim I owe them money for 3 movies I returned, but they lost, and I have to explain this to the collection company that keeps sending me letters.
I've heard many people claim a "moral wrong" in blocking ads. How they get to this, I really don't know.....
Advertising, unless you explicitly ask for it, is unwanted. Advertisers are solicitors: They are asking for money in return for a service or product. Charities, although not offering a product or service, are still asking for money and are also solicitors.
Consider this: You are sitting on a park bench reading SlashDot. Later, someone else comes over and sits next to you, and starts talking to you. You aren't interested in any products or services he's offering, and ask him to stop. He refuses. You again ask him to stop. He continues to refuse. You put on a pair of earplugs, the kind they use at shooting ranges, to block out the drivel you don't want to listen to. Is this wrong? Absolutely not. It may be a public place, but ignoring the stranger is legal, while harassing someone for a sale or panhandling, is not. However, one nations' laws cannot be enforced in another nation.
AdBlocking is the Internet equivalent of earplugs. It is also the equivalent of saying "Leave me alone! I don't want to listen to you and I'm not going to buy anything from you!". You you shouldn't have to listen to an ENDLESS FLOOD of sales pitches, product offers, "Special 1-Day Deals", porn ads, and "You are the 1 Millionth Visitor!" that you don't want to.
I have heard a seemingly endless number of arguments that claim AdBlocking is stealing. Stealing? Not at all. Stealing is when you take something from someone else and keep it as your own. By AdBlocking, you aren't taking anything from the site operator and keeping for yourself. You may be costing them clickstream revenue, but your are not stealing since you aren't getting anything in from it.
Someone should cook up a script that sends the site operator a message that says "I don't want your stinking ads!" whenever it detects, and blocks, ads.
" The results add asthma to a catalog of undesirable outcomes, including obesity, diabetes, smoking, and promiscuity, tied to TV viewing."
Ok..... obesity, diabetes, and smoking I can definitely find true. Promiscuity, sort of, but only in the sense that it leads to a lack of knowledge about reality and people learning social norms through Big Media and Hollywood.
Asthma, on the other hand, would require a whole hell of a lot more evidence, study, and explaination than simply correlation.
"I hope that with the current budget we'll be able to keep up funding for this potentially fruitful venture...shows more promise than ethanol ever did."
Ever gone drinking after a bad breakup? Ethanol shows plenty of promise, albeit temporarily.....
"'This is like James Bond destroying his instructions as soon as he has read them,' says John Ainslie, the co-ordinator of the Scottish Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, adding that 'perhaps the plans for making Fogbank were so secret that no copies were kept."
I can see how film piracy can be used to finance terrorism, but only if the copies are actually sold for cash, and not distributed freely online.
Any counterfeit object can be used to finance anything. North Korea has a massive US currency scheme, and China offers just about anything counterfeit. Seeing as how the government controls the industries, the profits directly support the government.
"Are you an idiot, or a troll? This is not a false dichotomy - there's no third way. Smoking of the hemp plant has been shown for years to have health benefits, people have used it for multiple purposes including successfully as a medication for literally millenia, yet you're going to let big pharma tell you which medications are or aren't safe?"
---No, I'm going to let multiple studies show me that the hazards of smoking hemp are far more significant than the benefits. It's called a scientific study. I would never listen to Big Pharma tell me what's safe: I'll use my own observations of people who are stoned and the studies that show pot can cause severe mental problems, especially in cognition. You must have been stoned when you were taking Biopsychology 101.
The same went for PCP: The benefits were anesthesia. The hazards were severe psychotic episodes, delusions, hallucinations, and sometimes death.
Just because something has benefits does NOT mean its safe. Tobacco has been used for millenia, and has shown some benefits, namely appetite suppression. Would you call it safe?
DAMN STRAIGHT! Here in the People's Republik of Kalifornia, even dodgeball, tag, and football (unless its flag only) is either discouraged or no longer allowed because someone might get hurt.
The US has become a nanny-state just like the UK, with the blessings of the asshats in Berkeley who have their heads so far up their own asses they look like doughnuts.
They have this bizarre idea of turning this world into an idealistic utopia and preach freedoms, while restricting everything under the sun as "dangerous" or "hazardous". What we need is a television ad that tells these straight-jacket loving nutjobs that LIFE IS HAZARDOUS! EVERYTHING IS DANGEROUS!
I had all sorts of dangerous toys and other things when I was growing up (still am growing up!):
Magnetrons (radiation hazard) Lincoln Logs (now a choking hazard) Legos (chocking hazard) Steam Engines (the kinds that ran on Hexamine tablets) (fire/injury risk) Electric Trains (electrocution hazard) Chemistry Sets (toxic chemical/explosion hazard) Guns (explosion/injury/death risk) Firecrackers (fire/explosion/injury/death risk) Fishing Tackle (sharp object / toxic lead risk) Erector Sets (choking/injury hazard) ATV's (fire/injury/death risk) A Truck (fire/injury/death risk) Potato Cannons (fire/explosion/injury/death risk) Power Tools (fire/injury/death risk) Model Rockets (fire/explosion/injury/death risk) Thermite (fire/explosion/injury/death risk) A Kerosene Blowtorch (fire/explosion/injury/death risk) Tool Set (choking/injury hazard) Home-Made Bazooka (fire/explosion/injury/death hazard) Pneumatic Cannon (explosion/injury/death risk) Power Transformers (electrocution hazard) Smokeless Powder (explosion hazard) Gopher "gassers" (fire/injury/death/chemical hazard) Arc Welders / Acetylene Torches.....and the list goes on.....
Nothing bad ever happened. If I got hurt, I learned my lesson and didn't repeat what I did.
There is a country song, the name of which I can't remember, that laments the uber-sanitary/safety of everything nowadays. Drinking from a garden hose? Might get toxic chemicals from the rubber. Playing in the dirt? Might get germs. Working around farm animals? Might get anthrax, salmonella or E. Coli. Forget to wash that carrot or radish you just pulled out of the ground? Bad idea, because you might get anthrax, or E. Coli from the dirt.
Funny, the same people who think up all this shit are the same people who think smoking pot is safe too.....
Someone ought to put up a public Heath & Safety warning about listening to over-protective idiots..........AND DON'T EVEN GET ME STARTED ON THE DAMNED "BANNED BOOK LIST"!
It's the same as the government-mandated warning on cigarettes and chewing tobacco.
Sitting in front of the TV or computer than, say, going outside and playing a game of catch, will almost certainly result in a loss of muscle, increase in fat, and increased health problems resulting from increased caloric intake and decreased activity, unless your diet consists of nothing but lettuce and water.
"What the kid did was annoying, disorderly and immature; no argument about that."
-Good, so you AND the cop AND the principal all agree that it was disorderly conduct.
"What the school and police did was irresponsible and a complete waste of public resources."
-No, it wasn't a waste of public resources. The girl will have to pay for all of the costs incurred as a result of her actions: Court, police, bail, fines are all paid by the violator, not just the fine.
"This was not a police matter. Very few things in a school are police matters."
-School officials, with the exception of School Resource Officers (who are Law Enforcement, not school officials), do NOT have the legal authority to frisk-search or use physical force (except in extenuating circumstances such as self-defense and breaking up fights) against someone who is non-compliant. Would you prefer they do?
"In this case, the teacher failed to properly supervise and discipline a student under their direct responsibility."
-They DID properly supervise her because they were able to notice she was texting on her phone during class. They DID properly discipline her by following an appropriate course of action (and 7 day suspension): Asking the student not to use the phone, Asking the student to stop using the phone, Asking the student to surrender the phone to the teacher, and then calling the principal who did all of the same. Unfortunately, the girl continued to disrupt the class and the next level of involvement was the police. They did all of this because the student WAS their responsibility.
"Suspend/detend the kid, sure, but cops ? Did someone get beat/stabbed/shot/raped ? No ? Then no cops."
-The student WAS suspended for 7 days, and forbidden from school property for that same period. So, short of a rape/shooting/stabbing, you think the cops should not be called at all? So how do you propse to deal with a continually defiant student? You have to get them to comply before you can do anything to them, and she wasn't complying with anybody, even disobeying the cops for a while.
"Idiot teachers like this are the leading reason why today's kids are such utter failures. They take after the moronic role models they're given."
-No, idiots like YOU with the horrible logic, "Innocent Child" argument, and responsibility avoindance are why todays kids are such utter failures
Why is it that winners for these types of contests always end up being some of the fugliest (Fugly = Fucking+Ugly) god-awful crap imaginable?!
Honestly, it's like a Paris fashion show.
I really don't get the logic behind the winners being things that NOBODY would ever, EVER buy, even if they could afford it.
The winners should be something that not only is new and innovative, but also something that people would WANT to buy or build and put the idea to good use. It's worthless if nobody would want to use it.
Obviously, card-counting with a device, mechanical, electronic, or even a pencil and paper, is flagrantly illegal. Everybody knows this.
However, card-counting in your head is not.
*BUT* they can kick you out if they suspect you are counting cards in your head, or will use any number of methods to screw up your mental counting, such as distraction (hecklers, waitresses with great tits, etc. They use the same methods for dice controllers too.).
Keep in mind, if someone says "This table is too hot for you", then leave. Immediately.
Card Counters caught cheating with a device are handed over to the police (if they are lucky), your mugshot is taken by casino personnel, and you are placed into a Black Book database, and effectively banned from every casino with access to the database.
"Chris Walters writes about Facebook's new terms of service. 'Facebook's terms of service (TOS) used to say that when you closed an account on their network, any rights they claimed to the original content you uploaded would expire. Not anymore. Now, anything you upload to Facebook can be used by Facebook in any way they deem fit, forever, no matter what you do later. Want to close your account? Good for you, but Facebook still has the right to do whatever it wants with your old content. They can even sublicense it if they want.'"
So, if I violate the TOS by withdrawing my rights for them to use my content from an account I want to close, does my account get closed for failing to abide by the TOS?
It's kind of like saying "You have to let us use your content". Well, if I want to leave Facebook, it's like them saying "If you don't give us permission to use your content after you close your account, then we'll close your account".
I kind of don't get their logic. I can still withdraw my consent for them to use my content since:
1) I opened the account under an agreement that existed prior to the change, and 2) If they close my account for violating their TOS by withdrawing my consent allowing them to use my content after I close the account, then I could really care less if they closed it for a TOS violation when I wanted to close it in the first place.
It's easy to prevent them from doing this anyways:
All you need to do is put a tiny "Copyright (date)" notice at the bottom of your photos. They'll never catch it, and when they do try to use it, it's still copyrighted. I copyright my photos, and have an Access/Copyright/Restricted Use warning on my page.
Technically, this violates their TOS, but they don't/won't/can't possibly filter cmpletely through the millions of other pages and photos that they host.
Slashdot Mirror
How can people be so fucking stupid?!
What on Earth could make somebody flagrantly disregard instructions and risk jail time just so they could blog on Twitter to all their friends? Why not wait until AFTER the trial? So you were a juror sitting on a trial..... WHO THE FUCK CARES?! WE'VE ALL DONE BEEN THERE!
The judge ought to have beat the idiot to death with his gavel. It would have been a good example of 'Public Service'.
My dad can beat up your dad.....
After people get tired of that, I expect an uptick in the number of "Double-Dog-Uber-Dares"
How about being 'Unlocked' as a feature?
$1500 headphones are made using $30,000 screwdrivers.
Got to pay for all those capital investments somehow.....
Blockbuster *IS* corrupt. I used to work for them, and know firsthand the slimy tactics used.....
The part that really pissed me off was when I worked 21 days in a row, and was told that I'd be getting overtime for every additional 7 days I worked. Overtime was every seven days: Regular time the first 7 days, then 1.5x the next, then 2x, and so on. The store manager kept calling me in, and told me that I would get overtime on this schedule.
When I went to collect my overtime pay, the DM said "It doesn't matter what you manager told you, we're only gonna pay you what we are required to under CA law", and paid me $111.00 for overtime.
When I called to explain this, the DM got really snotty. I told him I was now in a big financial spot since I had just paid for a brand-new M1A-1 semiautomatic rifle (which was followed by an awkward silence). He than just gave a smarmy reply and said he had to go.
Not only that, they still claim I owe them money for 3 movies I returned, but they lost, and I have to explain this to the collection company that keeps sending me letters.
You'd think that they would choose March 3(.14) as National Pi Day.
For me, everyday is Pi(e) Day.....
Yep.....Nothing more covert than a big, black blimp buzzing around underneath a blue sky.
My favorite part: "Because of its altitude it would be safe from surface-to-air missiles and most aircraft."
-That's the same school of thought that led to the U-2 incident'.....
Looks like my $10 pair of gloves beats their $420,000 fingerprinting device.....
Me: 1,275 DHS: 0
"You agree to use it at the cost of viewing ads."
-No, I didn't. Many others didn't either.
I've heard many people claim a "moral wrong" in blocking ads. How they get to this, I really don't know.....
Advertising, unless you explicitly ask for it, is unwanted. Advertisers are solicitors: They are asking for money in return for a service or product. Charities, although not offering a product or service, are still asking for money and are also solicitors.
Consider this: You are sitting on a park bench reading SlashDot. Later, someone else comes over and sits next to you, and starts talking to you. You aren't interested in any products or services he's offering, and ask him to stop. He refuses. You again ask him to stop. He continues to refuse. You put on a pair of earplugs, the kind they use at shooting ranges, to block out the drivel you don't want to listen to. Is this wrong? Absolutely not. It may be a public place, but ignoring the stranger is legal, while harassing someone for a sale or panhandling, is not. However, one nations' laws cannot be enforced in another nation.
AdBlocking is the Internet equivalent of earplugs. It is also the equivalent of saying "Leave me alone! I don't want to listen to you and I'm not going to buy anything from you!". You you shouldn't have to listen to an ENDLESS FLOOD of sales pitches, product offers, "Special 1-Day Deals", porn ads, and "You are the 1 Millionth Visitor!" that you don't want to.
I have heard a seemingly endless number of arguments that claim AdBlocking is stealing. Stealing? Not at all. Stealing is when you take something from someone else and keep it as your own. By AdBlocking, you aren't taking anything from the site operator and keeping for yourself. You may be costing them clickstream revenue, but your are not stealing since you aren't getting anything in from it.
Someone should cook up a script that sends the site operator a message that says "I don't want your stinking ads!" whenever it detects, and blocks, ads.
For every dollar lost, Steve Jobs cries one, single tear.
Somebody get him a couple pallets of Kleenex, 'cause I'm sure not going to.....
" The results add asthma to a catalog of undesirable outcomes, including obesity, diabetes, smoking, and promiscuity, tied to TV viewing."
Ok..... obesity, diabetes, and smoking I can definitely find true. Promiscuity, sort of, but only in the sense that it leads to a lack of knowledge about reality and people learning social norms through Big Media and Hollywood.
Asthma, on the other hand, would require a whole hell of a lot more evidence, study, and explaination than simply correlation.
Give me a couple bran muffins, a loaf of bread, and a bottle of soda, and I'll give them a download they can tax all they want.
"I got your taxes RIGHT HERE, pal....."
"I hope that with the current budget we'll be able to keep up funding for this potentially fruitful venture...shows more promise than ethanol ever did."
Ever gone drinking after a bad breakup? Ethanol shows plenty of promise, albeit temporarily.....
"'This is like James Bond destroying his instructions as soon as he has read them,' says John Ainslie, the co-ordinator of the Scottish Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, adding that 'perhaps the plans for making Fogbank were so secret that no copies were kept."
This is more like Inspector Gadget.
"This message will self-destruct!"
I can see how film piracy can be used to finance terrorism, but only if the copies are actually sold for cash, and not distributed freely online.
Any counterfeit object can be used to finance anything. North Korea has a massive US currency scheme, and China offers just about anything counterfeit. Seeing as how the government controls the industries, the profits directly support the government.
Wow.....
Best. Sig. EVER.
"Are you an idiot, or a troll? This is not a false dichotomy - there's no third way. Smoking of the hemp plant has been shown for years to have health benefits, people have used it for multiple purposes including successfully as a medication for literally millenia, yet you're going to let big pharma tell you which medications are or aren't safe?"
---No, I'm going to let multiple studies show me that the hazards of smoking hemp are far more significant than the benefits. It's called a scientific study. I would never listen to Big Pharma tell me what's safe: I'll use my own observations of people who are stoned and the studies that show pot can cause severe mental problems, especially in cognition. You must have been stoned when you were taking Biopsychology 101.
The same went for PCP: The benefits were anesthesia. The hazards were severe psychotic episodes, delusions, hallucinations, and sometimes death.
Just because something has benefits does NOT mean its safe. Tobacco has been used for millenia, and has shown some benefits, namely appetite suppression. Would you call it safe?
DAMN STRAIGHT! Here in the People's Republik of Kalifornia, even dodgeball, tag, and football (unless its flag only) is either discouraged or no longer allowed because someone might get hurt.
The US has become a nanny-state just like the UK, with the blessings of the asshats in Berkeley who have their heads so far up their own asses they look like doughnuts.
They have this bizarre idea of turning this world into an idealistic utopia and preach freedoms, while restricting everything under the sun as "dangerous" or "hazardous". What we need is a television ad that tells these straight-jacket loving nutjobs that LIFE IS HAZARDOUS! EVERYTHING IS DANGEROUS!
I had all sorts of dangerous toys and other things when I was growing up (still am growing up!):
Magnetrons (radiation hazard) .....and the list goes on.....
Lincoln Logs (now a choking hazard)
Legos (chocking hazard)
Steam Engines (the kinds that ran on Hexamine tablets) (fire/injury risk)
Electric Trains (electrocution hazard)
Chemistry Sets (toxic chemical/explosion hazard)
Guns (explosion/injury/death risk)
Firecrackers (fire/explosion/injury/death risk)
Fishing Tackle (sharp object / toxic lead risk)
Erector Sets (choking/injury hazard)
ATV's (fire/injury/death risk)
A Truck (fire/injury/death risk)
Potato Cannons (fire/explosion/injury/death risk)
Power Tools (fire/injury/death risk)
Model Rockets (fire/explosion/injury/death risk)
Thermite (fire/explosion/injury/death risk)
A Kerosene Blowtorch (fire/explosion/injury/death risk)
Tool Set (choking/injury hazard)
Home-Made Bazooka (fire/explosion/injury/death hazard)
Pneumatic Cannon (explosion/injury/death risk)
Power Transformers (electrocution hazard)
Smokeless Powder (explosion hazard)
Gopher "gassers" (fire/injury/death/chemical hazard)
Arc Welders / Acetylene Torches
Nothing bad ever happened. If I got hurt, I learned my lesson and didn't repeat what I did.
There is a country song, the name of which I can't remember, that laments the uber-sanitary/safety of everything nowadays. Drinking from a garden hose? Might get toxic chemicals from the rubber. Playing in the dirt? Might get germs. Working around farm animals? Might get anthrax, salmonella or E. Coli. Forget to wash that carrot or radish you just pulled out of the ground? Bad idea, because you might get anthrax, or E. Coli from the dirt.
Funny, the same people who think up all this shit are the same people who think smoking pot is safe too.....
Someone ought to put up a public Heath & Safety warning about listening to over-protective idiots..... .....AND DON'T EVEN GET ME STARTED ON THE DAMNED "BANNED BOOK LIST"!
It's about time.....
It's the same as the government-mandated warning on cigarettes and chewing tobacco.
Sitting in front of the TV or computer than, say, going outside and playing a game of catch, will almost certainly result in a loss of muscle, increase in fat, and increased health problems resulting from increased caloric intake and decreased activity, unless your diet consists of nothing but lettuce and water.
"What the kid did was annoying, disorderly and immature; no argument about that."
-Good, so you AND the cop AND the principal all agree that it was disorderly conduct.
"What the school and police did was irresponsible and a complete waste of public resources."
-No, it wasn't a waste of public resources. The girl will have to pay for all of the costs incurred as a result of her actions: Court, police, bail, fines are all paid by the violator, not just the fine.
"This was not a police matter. Very few things in a school are police matters."
-School officials, with the exception of School Resource Officers (who are Law Enforcement, not school officials), do NOT have the legal authority to frisk-search or use physical force (except in extenuating circumstances such as self-defense and breaking up fights) against someone who is non-compliant. Would you prefer they do?
"In this case, the teacher failed to properly supervise and discipline a student under their direct responsibility."
-They DID properly supervise her because they were able to notice she was texting on her phone during class. They DID properly discipline her by following an appropriate course of action (and 7 day suspension): Asking the student not to use the phone, Asking the student to stop using the phone, Asking the student to surrender the phone to the teacher, and then calling the principal who did all of the same. Unfortunately, the girl continued to disrupt the class and the next level of involvement was the police. They did all of this because the student WAS their responsibility.
"Suspend/detend the kid, sure, but cops ? Did someone get beat/stabbed/shot/raped ? No ? Then no cops."
-The student WAS suspended for 7 days, and forbidden from school property for that same period. So, short of a rape/shooting/stabbing, you think the cops should not be called at all? So how do you propse to deal with a continually defiant student? You have to get them to comply before you can do anything to them, and she wasn't complying with anybody, even disobeying the cops for a while.
"Idiot teachers like this are the leading reason why today's kids are such utter failures. They take after the moronic role models they're given."
-No, idiots like YOU with the horrible logic, "Innocent Child" argument, and responsibility avoindance are why todays kids are such utter failures
Why is it that winners for these types of contests always end up being some of the fugliest (Fugly = Fucking+Ugly) god-awful crap imaginable?!
Honestly, it's like a Paris fashion show.
I really don't get the logic behind the winners being things that NOBODY would ever, EVER buy, even if they could afford it.
The winners should be something that not only is new and innovative, but also something that people would WANT to buy or build and put the idea to good use. It's worthless if nobody would want to use it.
Obviously, card-counting with a device, mechanical, electronic, or even a pencil and paper, is flagrantly illegal. Everybody knows this.
However, card-counting in your head is not.
*BUT* they can kick you out if they suspect you are counting cards in your head, or will use any number of methods to screw up your mental counting, such as distraction (hecklers, waitresses with great tits, etc. They use the same methods for dice controllers too.).
Keep in mind, if someone says "This table is too hot for you", then leave. Immediately.
Card Counters caught cheating with a device are handed over to the police (if they are lucky), your mugshot is taken by casino personnel, and you are placed into a Black Book database, and effectively banned from every casino with access to the database.
"Chris Walters writes about Facebook's new terms of service. 'Facebook's terms of service (TOS) used to say that when you closed an account on their network, any rights they claimed to the original content you uploaded would expire. Not anymore. Now, anything you upload to Facebook can be used by Facebook in any way they deem fit, forever, no matter what you do later. Want to close your account? Good for you, but Facebook still has the right to do whatever it wants with your old content. They can even sublicense it if they want.'"
So, if I violate the TOS by withdrawing my rights for them to use my content from an account I want to close, does my account get closed for failing to abide by the TOS?
It's kind of like saying "You have to let us use your content". Well, if I want to leave Facebook, it's like them saying "If you don't give us permission to use your content after you close your account, then we'll close your account".
I kind of don't get their logic. I can still withdraw my consent for them to use my content since:
1) I opened the account under an agreement that existed prior to the change, and
2) If they close my account for violating their TOS by withdrawing my consent allowing them to use my content after I close the account, then I could really care less if they closed it for a TOS violation when I wanted to close it in the first place.
It's easy to prevent them from doing this anyways:
All you need to do is put a tiny "Copyright (date)" notice at the bottom of your photos. They'll never catch it, and when they do try to use it, it's still copyrighted. I copyright my photos, and have an Access/Copyright/Restricted Use warning on my page.
Technically, this violates their TOS, but they don't/won't/can't possibly filter cmpletely through the millions of other pages and photos that they host.
".....to provide the city with its own self-sustaining food source while dynamically altering the fabric of city life."
-Food like what? Crack?