Yeah, I kind of wonder how long this will last. The whole point of cable used to be that unlike broadcast TV, which sent its signal out for free to its viewers and was supported by ads, cable was supported by the viewers and didn't need to degrade the audience's experience with commercial breaks.
That lasted a while, but now... yeah. And so now people are turning to services like Netflix, because they're supported by the viewers and don't need to degrade the audience's experience with commercial breaks...
Understanding that "doctors" practice "medicine" and how humans are NOT graded for purity, I type "define medicine" into a search engine and got: the science or practice of the diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of disease
Please tell me you're not really that dense. Medication (also known as "medicine" in colloquial speech, not to be confused with "the practice of medicine," which shouldn't need to be pointed out because no one actually confuses them) is pharmaceutical drugs in the modern age. It's stuff that's been properly studied and understood by scientists, rather than the traditional or "well I heard it works" folk remedies of the dark ages.
Its a good thing then all the doctors who prescribed the drugs that adverse side effects resulting in lawsuits have had their doctoring licences pulled. Vioxx, Phen-Phen, et al must have just left only responsible doctors in the field.
OK, you're just being intentionally disingenuous here. There's a huge difference between a doctor prescribing something that they believe is safe but actually isn't because the doctor was lied to and something that they know full well isn't proper medication. (Worth looking up: the concept of mens rea.
Really? Taking in vapours of a set of chemicals to achieve a dosing is bad? It is too darn bad the makers of nebulizers, inhalers, or even vaporizers don't know about the liability minefield they are entering.
No, and that's not what I said. I said smoking is bad for reasons that need not be explained, and if you seriously do need an explanation and you're not just trolling, then please go away and let the grown-ups talk.
Yes, just about any argument can be made to look ridiculous by horribly oversimplifying it and taking it completely out of context. That's why mockery is frequently considered an automatic "whoever does this first loses the debate" point, right up there with Godwin's Law.
Because "medical" marijuana is a joke. Any responsible doctor can tell you that smoking pot is completely antithetical to the practices of modern medicine, for several reasons:
1) Real medicine is produced to a laboratory-certified grade of purity, generally mixed with inert fillers, and dispensed at a controlled dose. Weed is... well... a weed. It's not a medicinal drug; it's a plant that contains a (supposedly) medicinal drug.
2) Speaking of laboratory-purified medicinal drugs, studies have shown that patients do not receive the same therapeutic benefits from laboratory-purified THC (the active ingredient in marijuana) that "medicinal marijuana" proponents claim the plant confers. There are really only two possible explanations for this. Either "medicinal marijuana" proponents are flat-out lying, simply looking for an excuse to get stoned, or they're telling the truth, which means there's another active ingredient in there and we don't know what it is or what its properties are yet. If the first is true, explanation then there's no such thing as medicinal marijuana, and if the second is true, then it's something no responsible doctor would ever prescribe due to unknown drug risks. (Allergies, interactions, etc.)
3) Marijuana is frequently (though not always) ingested by smoking. Again, this is something no responsible doctor would ever prescribe, for reasons that I hope do not need to be elaborated upon in 21st century America.
There's medicine, and then there's marijuana, but the idea of conflating the two is absolutely ridiculous to anyone who knows anything about medicine.
The foundation’s officials said that their aim is to “make sure that Anne Frank stays Anne,” Mr. Kugelmann said, by maintaining control and avoiding inappropriate exploitation of the work. “When she died, she was a young girl who was not even 16. We are protecting her. That is our task.”
...and now she's 70 years dead. Hate to break it to you, Mr. Kugelmann, but if there's anyone out there with the desire and the means to harm her, she needs protection that a lawyer or an administrator can't provide. And if there isn't, then you're full of crap.
T-Mobile wants to suggest it’s saving customers by exempting video from its data caps. But we have to remember that T-Mobile imposed these caps in the first place. It’s a cheap sales trick: First you fabricate a problem for customers; then you make that problem go away and act like you’ve done them a huge favor.
As I've said before, would anyone think Superman was a hero for rescuing a bunch of people from a burning building, if he had used his heat vision to start the fire?
Rep. Issa actually asked if there should be criminal punishment for bogus takedowns, which I think took people by surprise, and probably goes too far.
I'm not sure. If we're going to go by the legal fiction that intellectual property is... well... property, then a bad-faith takedown is an attempt to destroy/vandalize someone else's property. Why not treat it as such?
as well as one for Tim Cushing, who is listed together with Sam Glover (I have no idea why).
Do you have any idea who? Sam Glover isn't mentioned anywhere in the article except here. He was added to the tags for the story, but the only article under his tag is this one. Who is this mysterious person?
As obnoxious, and frequently outright evil, as Facebook often is, I don't actually see anything wrong with this particular decision. They saw their users being innundated with spammy links to a site running a classic scam, and shut the practice down. That's exactly the sort of thing a good moderator should do.
The problem with the "just let the users decide" idea is that informed consent requires information, and most people don't know that tsu.co is running a pyramid scheme.
The only thing I would change is adding a note or link to the "blocked content" popup explaining why this content is blocked.
I'm reminded of an episode of Leverage where the victim of the week worked at a cooking school before the boss turned evil and forced him and his students out. He tells the team that he heard the boss talking with some shady foreign guys about buying some product for $12,000 a kilo. Elliot immediately says "cocaine." But after they infiltrate the place, they find out it's not cocaine... it's truffles!