If we valued them more, we would pay them more, and if we paid them more, there would be more of them. At least in America.

I think if you parse out the words of the First Amendment, you get that there shall be no law abridging the freedom of speech. A liberal reading of that would be that the freedom to speak anonymously exists already (you can send an anonymous letter to a newspaper, for example). In that sense, although this law does…

This is a New York law; so it would be Governor Cuomo doing the signing. I doubt it'll ever come near his desk, but if it did, he'd probably veto it also.

I mean, I've watched dozens of the minute physics clips, and they usually are more easily understood. I guess the point of the Giz post was that it's easy to digest, and I didn't find this one easy to digest at all. I already understand how force and momentum work, and I get the concept of gauge bosons. But the whole…

I can't say I'm any wiser for watching that. I mean, it's understandable to some degree, but it didn't really cause me to grasp anything.

Here's one from France. It comes from an article from a while back that showed pictures of school lunches from around the world: [www.buzzfeed.com] The fries are kind of nasty, but I'd flip for the mussels.

I'm a hybrid of Music and Encyclopedia, with a little Gadget thrown in.

Now I want to go play some Bonk's Revenge.

People are naturally risk averse, and we tend to falsely overvalue losses and undervalue gains. It's the preservation instinct at work—you can't knock it, because it's done a whole lot of good for us in the past, but it also holds us back in a lot of ways.

Nobody is saying "get in the cannon." I think the argument here is that nothing can ever be accomplished if we can't accept risk. The argument is that at some point, you have to make that calculation. The author isn't necessarily saying that our space program is perfectly fine and we should just start shooting dudes…

It's not that hard. Try this one:

Whoa, they have to cool it to -100ºC? Taking a picture of your junk with that thing is gonna be WAY dangerous. Sorry, I'll pass.

There's some debate about whether it really needs to be that done. If your pork is from a good source, the difference in risk between a well done chop and a slightly pink one is negligible.

I was going to mention this, but you have it all right so it's a promote. Neurocysticercosis is a aberrant-host, or dead-end host, situation. Another genus of tapeworm that does this is Echinococcus, although the "classic" site for that is the liver.

This is how it reads to me, that they worshipped dogs as being supreme in some way. But the facts in the article really only say that they afforded them some sort of respectful burial, so I'd say they just cared about their dogs like people, similar to the present day.

Oh, I accidentally deleted a word. I am an internet doofus! You so smart! Typing errors are such strong indicators of a person's English usage and comprehension! Get a life. I'm pretty sure I'm good at English. For your enjoyment, I have deleted the word "dog(s)" from the remainder of this comment. See if you can find…

Does the fact that they buried their in ritual fashion necessarily mean they worshipped dogs? Or am I reading the word "worship" out of context here?

A Flatiron steak comes from the infraspinatus, which has a pretty big tendon running down the middle of it. You could probably call it silverskin, but that usually refers to the fascia on the outside of the muscle, at least the way I've always understood it.

But if the whites are cooked, then they're no longer clear, and you won't see the yolk anyway. If you can still see through, then there are whites there that aren't completely cooked through. I suppose you could keep the heat low enough that the egg cooks through from the bottom up (without burning the bottom), but…

These are just tips for cooking the top of an egg. How do they improve upon the traditional way, ie., flipping the egg over?