Do you have a source citing both Amazon and Google have not (re)built their sites on top of their public cloud services? Also, it is possible Amazon has built their website on top of AWS, and incorporating multi-region durability. This would make it possible for an AWS region to go down, and Amazon to still operate.
I was drinking with an Asian co-worker at work today and something somewhat relevant came up. A 3rd coworker asked my Asian coworker "Are you ok? Your face is red and puffy". And then he stated that Asians (saying all Asians is probably a generalization, but for this example let's assume it is true) lack an enzyme to process alcohol and that Asians are essentially allergic to alcohol. Under this definition, would it be racist to say that all other races except for Asians are inferior at processing alcohol? Even if the following is true: alcohol was less prevalent in Asian cultures and that is probably why they never evolved to possess the same enzyme, which was stated by the other coworker.
True that it may not be the reason they have flopped, but honestly every co-worker of mine that has worked at Microsoft states our review process drives performance above all else. And the sample size isn't small, I'm in SLU at Amazon.
It was researched by the military for interrogation purposes IIRC. I think they used human subjects for this so I doubt any lethal doses were given, and doubt even further that they would be published if so.
That is nothing compared to the quantities described in the article, both in measurement and experience (as mentioned). This is assuming you meant to type micrograms, as no one would have a club for 700 mg as no one would bother to measure at that dose, considering it is 7,000x the normal dose.
So your app that just got released and has 100 downloads should appear before an app that has been out for a longer period of time and has more downloads? I don't really think this makes sense from a user perspective, maybe fiddling with the search results once or twice to show recent apps, but it doesn't make sense to permanently move an app like yours up the list. Sorry if this comes off as harsh.
iTunes will play all of your songs without repeats until you have heard them all as-is. A user would simply go to their music collection, select the shuffle action, and then begin playing a song. No song will be repeated until all of them have been played, which you should have been able to take away if you read the OP or the comment thread. As for the fact that your app is $5, I will refrain from saying anything besides do not spam the link to it on HN please.