I'm sure that plenty of people have examined statistical data to make conclusions of this sort. The interesting question would be whether anyone seriously studied the effect that the buyer:seller ratio has on prices.
The standard of proof was preponderance of evidence, meaning that Pao failed to prove that P(KP is biased) > P(KP is not biased), or, alternatively, that the jury found that P(KP is not biased) >= P(KP is biased).
If the function of the pill is solely to mimic exercise, then it does not offer any new treatment. Obesity and diabetes can be treated just as well right now, and the treatment is exercise.
Or to Mark Twain's estate, seeing as he actually wrote those words in the first place.
In addition to what other commenters said, even once the money is given back, this still amounts to a loan without interest. I would call that unprincipled.
"and a navy." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_language_is_a_dialect_with_a...
"Regret" is the answer of the original incarnation, if that's any comfort.
I'm sure that plenty of people have examined statistical data to make conclusions of this sort. The interesting question would be whether anyone seriously studied the effect that the buyer:seller ratio has on prices.
The standard of proof was preponderance of evidence, meaning that Pao failed to prove that P(KP is biased) > P(KP is not biased), or, alternatively, that the jury found that P(KP is not biased) >= P(KP is biased).
If the function of the pill is solely to mimic exercise, then it does not offer any new treatment. Obesity and diabetes can be treated just as well right now, and the treatment is exercise.
Or to Mark Twain's estate, seeing as he actually wrote those words in the first place.
In addition to what other commenters said, even once the money is given back, this still amounts to a loan without interest. I would call that unprincipled.
"and a navy." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_language_is_a_dialect_with_a...
"Regret" is the answer of the original incarnation, if that's any comfort.