I was working in the electronics department of a Wal-Mart in St. Louis, Missouri when it happened. It was the first job I had ever had, and as customers came in that morning, we started hearing stories about the twin towers. It sounded really important to me and the department manager, but the home office wouldn't switch all the televisions hanging around the store from The Wal-Mart TV Network to the local news. The department manager and I eventually got tired of the inaction, took one of the large TV antennas we had for sale (the kind you mounted on a roof), and tried to assemble it ourselves to see if we could get our own signal. In the midst of that, the home office eventually relented and broadcast the news throughout the entire store.
I didn't feel much of anything as I watched it. I had just graduated from high school that year with the belief that I was a fraud who would never amount to anything, and it would take years to work through that. The attack seemed to take place in a completely separate world from my own. I was pretty sure everything would turn out OK though as I worked on my own problems. I decided to leave the disaster to the people who knew how to handle it, but later learned that such responsible people only exist in Norway, apparently.
The dangerous medicines you're talking about are pills, which people may be allergic to and always have side effects, sometimes to the point that doctors prescribe multiple medications just to eliminate the side effects of other medications.
Vaccines are a completely different beast. The only one that MIGHT be a concern is the Chickenpox vaccine, because that virus has a tendency to flee the immune system and hide out in your body for decades before re-emerging as Shingles. But last I saw, even that vaccine had gradually acquired a bulletproof success rate.
I am only referring to that one sentence. The rest of the article does not matter.
That's where you're wrong. By deliberately omitting important information (i.e., the rest of the article), you've chosen to dive head-first into a pool of ignorance. Looks like you're also trying to justify it by saying that everyone else except you is crazy. That's a dangerous, self-destructive power fantasy to get sucked into.
Well, you pretty obviously didn't read the entire thing. You just reacted to the first sentence. The second and third paragraphs seem to support your points pretty well, after all, and they didn't make me leery like your swear words have.
I'm not sure any form of advertising allows for a successful business model anymore. It's probably a good time to recirculate posts about alternatives to advertisement funding, plus write some new ones.
I suppose the real takeaway here is that people are well and truly fed up with propaganda and sensationalism polluting news outlets. This has been going on for at least a couple decades now, ever since Fox News started taking advantage of the industry's deregulation, and because functional news and journalism is like a country's nervous system, we've seen the entire nation become paralyzed as a result. Now people just want these poisons expelled and they'll worry about the rest later.
People are lazy. Forcing a criminal to actually put in some effort at carrying out misdeeds is a crime deterrent in and of itself. Make things easier for criminals though, and more people will suddenly decide that they want to be one.
These are some good points. I've always appreciated how consistent this site is when dealing with legal matters.
Still, I think the result of this case is a strike against the paparazzi, not journalism. It SHOULDN'T impact freedom of speech in chilling ways, but... well, we do live in a time where anything and everything is abused, so I understand the concern.
Well, to be fair, Apple vs. the FBI is complex because Apple has deliberately cultivated an image as a wizard that can do anything, and now that's come back to bite them in the rear. The question of encryption is binary though.
We're halfway to the Mega Man Battle Network series becoming reality, what with how we have many things connected to the internet even when they shouldn't be connected to the internet. Now someone just needs to invent NetNavis so we can do some virus busting.
What gets me about these comments is that even if you are right, what's the alternative? Siding with you? You sound like you're stuck in a fantasy drama where you're off to slay some fictitious evil. Who would want you as an ally?
When you label someone as a devil, you force others to play devil's advocate.