It's one thing to not read the whole TOS for services you consume and pay for, but ignoring it when using it commercially? Don't blame them and call them shady. They have to pay their employees and server costs to provide you the service.
Yes that's great if everyone abides by your philosophy. But if we're doing that and expecting others to abide by it why is the statement not just "reject the use of force or fraud to compel others". The whole catch 22 is there is no central authority to enforce the philosophy unless you're expecting people to be angels but then you could say something similar about communism being a better system.
I'm sorry I misread what you were saying as the thread came from one saying government control of force is not rquired as an open market on force is an alternative. I find a libertarian position much more defensible (at least as something that doesn't implode) with a caveat that there is some form of monopoly on force that is external to the market.
I found it was much easier to cut my daily calorie intake and increase fat burning by skipping an early breakfast and regular lunch and moving to coffee for hunger suppressant, a low-carb brunch and some other low-carb afternoon snacks instead. Before dinner, I do about 20 mins of mostly body-weight exercise. Then have a regular dinner including carbs and then some more high-glycemic carbs. Keeping low-carb for a long continuous part of the day lets your body burn a lot of fat for fuel, and it's easier to deny myself those things I like to eat if I know I can have them later in the day, and it's a very nice carrot to do regular exercise. I've also had the impetus to discover low-carb recipes I enjoy, making it a nice feedback loop. To help this process I began by going two weeks without carbs, as that was recommended to help get your body used to burning fat for fuel. I've enjoyed a much improved body composition and it's still getting better.
I bought a used Macbook Pro for ~$300 worth of bitcoins a couple of years ago. those bitcoins are worth ~$20K. My argument for why he should accept the deal was, "they will probably go up in value". I'm happy I did it.
This is utter baloney. For you who think systematic oppression of groups of people isn't a real thing, think again. Take, for instance, the poor literacy rate in the middle east. averaging 17%, now, are we to say "People of Arab decent obviously have a biological disadvantage when it comes to reading and writing, statistically it's clear!" um... no.
How about Africans? Do we say "They had a biological tendency to become slaves and not slave owners, because, like 95% of slaves are from Africa, it's obvious"?
You can keep going back in history. How about those lowborn people during the dark ages? they must have been real dunces.
The advancement of people has been a long slow march that builds achievement upon achievement, with each achievement advancement can accelerate, but set-backs can and do happen.
Don't fool yourself into thinking you'd have anywhere near the mental ability you do today if it wasn't for all the work people did before you and the society you were raised in and given encouragement, opportunities and protections to pursue your goals. There are millions of techniques you use and benefit from that other people worked out before you. If you didn't have them, you'd be groveling in the dirt or likely gravely suffering or dead.
Women, it hasn't even been a hundred years since they've had the right to vote in the U.S. Religious and cultural attitudes have kept them oppressed and discouraged. Christian men(among others) have been encouraged to keep their wives in line with physical abuse and the women pressured to accept it.
As a society, we've figured out ways to encourage and protect things to let them advance and grow, things that wouldn't have gotten there without it and we know it. Let's call it systematic freedom. People have fought and died and worked their asses off for it. We do this. Let us(Society(men, women and institutions)) do this for women. protect, defend, encourage. We are all humans.
> The judge is correct in stating that if Levison doesn't trust the government, then why should the government trust Levison
The judge is incorrect. The U.S. Government was designed to not completely trust itself. That's why there are checks and balances. Giving the FBI the private key lets them have unchecked access to data encrypted with it. It is wrong to asked to not be checked.
Also, we have ample proof that the US Government cannot be trusted period. An entity that cannot be trusted can still reflect on itself, realize it has done lots of wrongs, and trust others that are reaching for higher standards.
Checks and balances are passe. They are the antiquated notions of dead men. With computers and the internet ensuring the proper administration of justice via self-appointed and self-reviewed secret committees, we can finally live in peace and security.
All calories are not translated to weight equally, the efficiency your body uses them matters greatly.
Sure dieting couch-potatoes will lose weight, but it will include losing a lot of muscle.
I believe the most well researched book on fat control is Carb-Back Loading by John Kiefer, the references chapter is 50 pages, it's terribly fascinating.
Kiefer's stuff is very well cited, but many of the citations are kind of specious - he has a history of citing studies that, upon perusal, are unrelated or contradictory to what he claims.
