I a not afraid of terrorists. I am more worried about icy stairs or soap in the bath, in comparison they provide way higher risk of death or injury.
What I worry about is the reaction of the Governments, both mine and the Brussels Boondonglers. More “security”, more inconveniences, more restrictions, more criminalization of what used to be perfectly normal and free. Less freedom to be odd and unusual, too.
I worry about the War on the Unexpected, as Schneier calls it.
i had no idea the doctor had such a mouth on him… 
F u, u f’n f’er, just f’n make some f’n papercraft already! 
okay, this isn’t really on topic, but i am distracted easily and there was some sort of thought thread and remotely connects back somehow…lol.
Kiryas Joel?
enh it has run the course of useful discussion mostly.
is there a papercraft Sontaran?
Peltiers are good for cooling. For heating, just lay under the surface some tubes and connect them to the waste heat rejection system of the basement reactor. Or put in some radioisotope heaters.
And a simpler way could be a no-skid bottom of the bath, combined with a fixed-mount liquid soap dispenser. 
Thought:
Could a micro-reactor be used to synthesize hot asphalt in quantities useful for enhancing the the coefficient of friction in the shower? It can likely be worked up on a CNC or ESD machine, then we can prototype the controllers using leftover Easter ducks as a test bed.
there is, but it isn’t as good as the two i posted previously, hard to paper craft a potato with arms and legs. 
Several citations of those very words, right here. Ok? Citation Provided.
Would you like now to argue about if he was or was not objectively yelling? Sheesh.
I’d go for either in-situ 3d printing or for moulding or casting of a suitable elastomer.
Maybe even go for a commercial off-the-shelf mat used for that purpose, but bond it with silicone along all the mating surface for enough security and seal along the edges for easier cleaning.
I think the line is that the Emperor was at the mercy of Tojo. Which was more or less true. For a certain value of truth versus political expediency on Tojo’s part.
Medford might be nice, someday.
Because prosecuters aren’t comfortable with the words “sedition” or “treason”, and haven’t been for about 95 years.
I don’t quite agree. Treason is defined with a narrow scope. It’s not usually applicable, but because of the severity of the charge, the definition is clear and the burden of proof rigorous. People who throw the term “terrorism” around should consider doing likewise. As for sedition, it is quite broad and difficult to prove.
Neither of these overlap much with current US definitions of terrorism - as vague as those necessarily are.
Still, there are probably fifty felonies they can unambiguously pin on this guy. I don’t understand why so many complain that isn’t as good as one nebulous charge that they think has more emotional weight.
It’s true, the Confederacy isn’t a foreign power. Or any power, and that’s why we can use the word “terrorist”.
Completely misreading me. As the following poster notes, there’s a big difference between stating a reasonable opinion and doctoring evidence with the express intent of whipping up rabid furor against someone or some organization that you are opposed to.
There’s a big difference between saying that you don’t agree with planned parenthood, and demonizing them as the antichrist on earth, baby killers, etc… (particularly if you’re going to skew and falsify facts to do so).
I may be misreading you, but I think this is what you’re saying:
“I do not understand the difference between a reasonable statement of opposition and generating rhetoric designed solely to incite.”
The fact is that reasonable discussion would be the examples that you posted (followed by attempts to put statements into my mouth). When the discussion goes beyond that and you begin to demonize your opponent, you have to expect that the less than stable out there may take inspiration from your words to commit atrocities that you would never (hopefully) support.
A situation that would be similar is Donald tRump foaming at the mouth about immigrants. It’s not a surprise (at least to me) when he spews this sort of hateful bile, and some idiot goes out and beats the crap out of some poor immigrant. Now, the Rumpster is still free to spew his garbage, but my argument is that when speaking from such a high platform, you bear at least some ethical responsibility for the consequences of your words. Perhaps not legal consequences, but morally…
Yes, F the nutcases and protect your freedom of speech, but please practice your freedom with responsibility.
This, exactly and a thousand times this.
You are free to be the biggest shit spouting turd as long as you don’t cross the legal line/definition of “inciting”, but you are responsible, even if not legally.
I find your definition of the rule of law to be rather curious. Since under the constitution State and federal legislators are responsible for making law, and these “laws” as you state were made buy the courts and the Bureaucracy, and therefore under the constitution are not law, but the rules of men.
Again: sadly their tactics work exactly as intended because a person on their own is smart about their response, people as a group aren’t. When that group’s a government its worse because they think they’re smart and start passing “emergency” laws they promise will go away when the “threat” is over.
Oooh, oooh, I know this one!
