I have been personally ripped off more than once by companies that "went out of business." The parentheses because, in many cases (like this one) the closure is not what people visualize, with chained doors, etc. There are still assets, employees, offices. In one case I was able to recover what was owed by calling the officers of the "old" company at their "new" jobs, every day, until I got my money. Did they legally owe it to me? Technically, probably not. I shamed/annoyed them into it.

I don't know 2600 from The Readers Digest, but I DO read several titles distributed by TEN: The Enthusiast Network; in one case I know the people at the magazine personally. I'll be writing letters and having conversations with these publishers about the people they're doing business with.

I could make phone calls on it without carrying a separate phone. Beyond that and telling time, I can't think of any other use for a screen I'd want to wear on my wrist.

That locks us into an impossible scenario - anything related to a hovercraft as we know it is completely unsuitable as a consumer highway vehicle. So, the company MUST be talking about something else entirely.

This. It really doesn't matter whether he's charged with treason, data theft, or jaywalking - or tax evasion, for that matter. He's upset the apple cart of the people who re-interpret the law, and if he's ever out from under the protection of a nation the USA can't intimidate, he'll burn for it.

If Mr. Snowden is a traitor, we need to fix the laws until he ISN'T a traitor. He performed a valuable service to the citizens of this republic, and to the citizens of many other nations around the world.

(Muses to self...) "Gee, I hope I don't have to eject..." "YEEEEEE!!!"

There almost has to be more to this story than we're hearing, and I'd be interested in the details. Why dopes one have to "reconfigure" a server to disconnect a single, personally owned computer from a network? The doctors I know would pull the ethernet cable, pick up the computer and go home, without even thinking about the sever.

I've been driving for 40+ years. Dozens of cars; cheap cars, expensive cars, foreign and domestic. Never one problem with an ignition key or switch. I've driven two keyless cars; 50% of them are unreliable. You don't mandate abandonment of a simple, effective, inexpensive part - you mandate that the manufacturer not cut corners until failures begin.

Of course, this is all academic - the REAL reason is a step towards a mandated remote shutdown system.

Now that we know what the decor of the interior will be like, the remainder of actually designing a working spacecraft with a useful mission is trivial. We're almost to Mars! Did anyone note that, in the linked article, they talk about providing passengers with a "large digital display"? You get a video feed, not a window. Is it just me, but does that take away most of the impact of the experience?

Heh. I went to an all-boys Catholic high school in the early 70's. Response to a fight between two students (which included bullying, whether the victim defended himself or not) was essentially for the school disciplinarian to punch both kids in the face. Don't like it? Hire a lawyer, like my family had to.

It's almost inevetable that we MUST engineer the children of the future. Modern society has eliminated natural selection; the unfit no longer die off, they breed. If we don't start either selective breeding or genetic engineering, the average human will be a mess in a few centuries.

This rocket scientist has had his career, he's put in his 30. If he wants to devote his retirement to helping make sure people don't forget what we were once capable of, more power to him.

I'm actually surprised they're trying this; I wouldn't want to be the first one to take it up. Two things that are almost guaranteed trouble in aircraft are counter-rotating propellers and especially shaft-driven propellers. I see insufficient rear control surfaces (what are they going to do when they start to hit compressibility?), poor-to-no stability, and almost impossible emergency exit. The concept of an aircraft with poor visibility and no room for fuel or weapons as a fighter is laughable. They're not testing Bugatti's concept, because they're not powering it sufficiently to test the one thing it might have been good at - speed.

That IS a stupid... No, actually, it's not. I'm going to assume, however, that drinking a fluid that's probably floating around as globules inside your helmet, without choking on it, would be tricky. Also, "Ewww, helmet water!"

I disagree with your disagreement. Casinos were banning cameras for their own reasons, not due to the preferences of their patrons. Due to concern about cheating, etc. They caved to the number of customers who had cameras in their cell phones, which they would not leave behind. To compensate, they stepped up their own surveillance and security. I actually have experience trying to surreptitiously take pictures in bars for professional reasons (insurance) and people DO NOT LIKE IT, if they become aware of it - and not just the person I'm there to document!