Does the NSF have budget constraints? Do they have to determine which proposals get funded and which don't, or do they fund as much as they want? How do they prioritize their selections? Should those defining the budget have any input on the priorities? These seem pertinent questions that I see neither discussed nor addressed.

That was an intense response. Research.. who can argue with research? Did you have a specific research request? As a scientist, I suspect you can surmise an idea research path. Feel free to expound, ideally with less insult and more substance.

That day could be near; I think fear of that day is what is preventing its quick approach. I know I personally could accomplish much in that field of technology, but I don't consider it morally acceptable to do so.

It's dependent on society as a whole. Together, we determine demand, minimum wages, the availability of spending cash, etc. So, he's right, but there are caveats - impediments, if you will. A logical focal point would be to analyze these impediments, unless the goal is to transform society away from the 'free market'.

For instance, if there are no limits to the accumulation of wealth by the rich, then more of the circulating money is bound to be in their hands, as has been the trend for decades. This equates to less spenders, and less production. Perhaps if the distribution of wealth stabilized (not necessarily made equal) then more spending cash would be available to the lower classes (the masses, mostly). But that's only a possibility - odds are these people will continue to be stripped of wealth via planned obsolescence, usury, and generally taking advantage of ignorance/greed.

In what field, may I ask, are all these people with degrees not working for peanuts? I've been avoiding a degree on the basis that it won't guarantee me stable employment, just cost me time and money. Just wondering if I'm way off here.

Your definition of 'hell-bent on learning' is not necessarily the same as others'. I've continued to impress myself with the vastness/complexity of bodies of knowledge I can assimilate myself. With the right mindset and determination, the quality/comprehensiveness of your own skillset is unlimited.

Yes, and even those few people who become great programmers may struggle to find paying work doing it, and end up doing something else.

So you typically traverse paths within a 2d plane, and your vision is presented in essentially a 2d plane with 3d cues embedded. Your perspective of your traversal path limits your view of that space to a small section of it, whereas a 2d working plane on a computer monitor is wholly existent, and the user typically brings objects into and out of that space.

It seems to me there is much to be done in bringing our physical interaction and our visual interface with computers into a mode that is more intuitive and similar to how we interact with physical reality. Once we reach that milestone we can still take it further by maximizing the efficiency of how our minds track and model concepts that we are working with in tandem with a computer. My guess, at that point we'll need some kind of neuro-interface for sufficient feedback to the system to achieve satisfactory coupling of mind-machine.

This visual is hilarious.

First derivative of population is birthrate. We know population is directly correlated due to physics. We observe the birthrate changing in a predictable line. We make projections of that line. Second derivative appears a more rational choice. You have a reason to disagree?

You both assume democratic selection is an optimal strategy to render an employee whom wields power justly and wisely. Voting is an excellent way to gauge popular opinion.

At least with Liberty, one with enough intelligence to maintain a plot of arable land has the freedom to do so.

Yeah, how big must the bomb be before it's illegal? And just because we'd have to draw a line doesn't mean we shouldn't draw a line. Incidents occur and one of government's responsibilities is preventing chaos and tragedy.

Of course there are limits to freedom, but dismissing it is akin to a general dismissing the stockpile of ammunition. "We have strategies to discuss! Let's not worry about the ammo right now.."

Your version of 'best' is obviously best.