He just removed "territories" from the "Palestine territories" google picture because he thought it looked better. Now every major news outlet is carrying this (non)story.

This space has been intentionally left blank.

Mining isn't free - the cost of mining is actually less than the cost of electricity on normal desktop machines (otherwise everyone would be doing it already).

Proof: http://i.imgur.com/7o0xOiT.png

I WIN THE INETERNET!

http://xkcd.com/793/

No. Look at the top 1000 world strongest people. They're all men. Men and women and physically different (including our brains). It's not sexism that causes the strongest people to all be men, it's just physiology - men just have bigger muscles than women. But when the majority of engineers are male instead of saying "well I suppose the male brain is better suited for engineering tasks" cries of "sexism!" are made. To accuse an organization of sexism you have to find evidence of it (the proportion of females in the workforce is not evidence). It'd be like taking a count of all the letters used in Slashdot posts. a = 23,345,494, b = 12,342,463 etc, and then coming to the conclusion that Slashdot is letterist against the letter 'x' because it's used the least - the underlying belief being that "in any fair system, all letters would be used the same amount". This isn't true. It isn't true of men and women either.

Typically you see a rule like "at least 10% of the workforce m ust be x% female". This means that people will be hired according to their gender - sexism is built into the system. The same applies to many anti racist rules. You can't ever have rules that explicitly favor one gender over another.

If you can work remotely... it's probable that somewhere on the other side of the planet a potential employer will open up their work for you. Pessimism or optimism. Choose one.

Energy is measured in joules fools.

Perhaps when sending an email the user does not want to reveal his or her real name. By putting names in email addresses you make this impossible.

I think that this is a more accurate description of how creativity and intelligence works. People claim they "invented" or "created" a new machine or song, but in reality they just copied it from somewhere else in nature (with or without realizing it).

I am certain that the algorithms being used today will never result with human level AI. If we want to design strong AI we need to first prove P = NP. This is the missing key to solving our AI problems - it's why there's a huge difference between expectations and the reality of AI. I will spend much of my life trying to prove P = NP, no matter how many tell me it's completely futile. Do you think P = NP?

There is 0 chance someone is going to steal your luggage if its bright pink. It's that simple.