Polecat

>People form stronger bonds with animals that aren't edible.

True, but not with animals they have only seen picture of.

>On top of that, lions are regarded as noble animals, and this particular lion was killed in a dishonorable way, AND suffered for over 40 hours.

Dishonorable because it was a human who did it? Nature doesn't care about honor, really.

> killing it for no other reason than for some kind of misguided personal glory.

So would the issue then cover hunting as well, would there still have been an outcry if he did it legally?

Fair enough, but i don't think the large amount of people who got outraged about this do care.

I just wonder why people care about this one specific lion. Cause it had a nickname and was "famous"? No one cares about animals being killed on mass so we can eat them, i know i don't, but oh no, a lion is killed, they are running out of those in Zimbabwe. Is it because it had a dramatic story line? Everyone will forget about this "massive tragedy" in a few weeks anyway.

Agreed, that's the part i'm interested in the most

Sounds like your philosophy is being a bit of a dick

Science is my rifle. Intellect is my blade.

If we can somehow eliminate input lag.

Didn't the big tech companies make an agreement to not poach employees from each other?

Or anything "killer" in general. As evident by every MMORPG that is coming out being the "World of Warcraft killer" an then disappearing into obscurity after a few months of hype while WoW keeps on going.

Depression is a disorder, it's not people who just felt a bit sad and then killed themselves because they didn't have their priorities strait.

I remember hearing that a similar technique is used to spot infringement in dictionaries. Pretty clever.

How do you know they are fabricated?

Great point. But I really enjoyed reading the article for some reason, maybe it's just the style.

Restart their router :^)