GreyEyedGhost

I can answer yes in both directions. It's amazing the toll stress can have on your mental health, whether that stress be environmental factors or biochemical imbalances. In the right, or wrong, environment 6 years can completely change who you are.

This isn't to say she committed suicide, I don't know her and barely know of her, but your opinion is verifiably incorrect, and more likely to be incorrect for someone who has suffered significant trauma followed up by years of emotional abuse.

You make me want to be a worse person.

Canada simply can't afford to match America in conventional warfare. America has a more powerful military than the next 5 countries combined, and Canada isn't one of those. Unconventional warfare, on the other hand. I can't think of anything stupider than starting an unconventional war with a neighboring country with an incredibly long, weakly inhabited, border and a population that looks and sounds mostly like your own citizens. If even 1% of Canadians had a problem with that, there would be half a million insurgents that couldn't be easily identified.

Love that "disruptive" is a valid term for companies like that.

Why on earth would she have any interest in helping the company retain knowledge when the country that company is in has treated her so poorly? Move on and it's their loss.

I wouldn't say inevitable, but there seems to be a whole aspect of capitalism where doing that which is not done is the norm. So all those baby steps inevitably lead to a degree of rapaciousness that is hard to envision 20 or 40 years ago.

"How did we get here from there?" One step at a time.

Not all consequences are immediate.

Lol this is the typical takeaway. A better result would be to not engage in illegal practices and then it doesn't matter if you put it in writing, but that's not how you become a billionaire.

Yes, but if you increase the funding, they will say "Why is science so expensive?"

Why can't we spend $20 billion on a full-scale reactor that may very well not work? Why is science so slow?

Thos is a false trail. We certainly may be missing signs of life that don't follow patterns we aren't looking for, but that has no bearing on this case. The argument in this case would be if there were paths we knew of that could produce these chemicals that don't involve life, or paths that involve life on earth but could develop without life being present to produce these chemicals elsewhere. If we can't rule these options, and possibly others I haven't thought of, out, then we may only be left with alien life being the source of these chemicals.

Kind of my thought. China (or any single country as your supplier) isn't great for national security, but damn Trump for making that option look so palatable.