Yes, but remember that you can detect the missile you're trying to intercept because it's relatively close, and because it's giving off light/heat/smoke/etc due to its method of acceleration. In space the closeness goes away, and you're going to be extremely difficult to find. Giving a hint to your location by burning a bunch of fuel is going to be undesirable. Stealthy tactics, including a lot of boring drifting, will probably dominate.

What part of that suggests they're afraid Netflix will threaten them?

The problem is, history would suggest that you might be wrong, despite your firsthand experience. During the Gulf War, people were extremely confident that the American patriot missiles were shooting down Iraqi missiles, and they pointed to the clear rocket flying into the sky followed by a nice pop. It turned out that was often the operators detonating them after a miss to be safe. It's still not clear how many were shot down, but it's definitely not what was perceived (or claimed) at the time.

Ugh... except that Google said nothing of the sort. They plainly stated they want to hire more woman and see it as an issue.

Even just reading from that quote, the information did actually reach the brain first. It just didn't reach what the authors define as the "higher brain centers". You're not contradiction him. I'm not sure how the electromagnetic field strength of the heart was supposed to be relevant either.

He asks the question: "So why do we tolerate IT pros who don't understand the basics of how a computer or network works?".

If someone is skilled at IT, deeply understands computers and networking, and has critical thinking skills, they can get a better job. There are few people like that anywhere. Why would they be sitting around in IT? They should be designing a router.

And frankly speaking, they don't need to know the deep depths of how everything works. It would be silly for a hospital to demand that every staff member have the highest level of education. It's a waste of resources. The vast majority of work can be done by less skilled people. Just like in a hospital, if a diagnosis seems difficult, you can bring in the expert. You don't need a building full of experts. Sure, it would be nice, but the waste would be staggering.

You need someone's cooperation, so you send a letter demanding they do a bunch of things you know they object to on short notice and then demand money at the same time? Good luck with that.

Every major field that's taught in university has vastly more information than can be taught to students. The STEM fields are hardly unique that way.

What's odd is that the science and technology majors make an effort to push students as hard as possible, and the other majors choose not to. Look back on the standards at schools 100 years ago and you'll often see that the liberal arts curium seems way more difficult and thorough than it is today.

A lot of ad platforms already have a non-cookie mechanism working. Storing hashes of user agent and IP address is common. You have to go through a proxy or otherwise change IP address for that not to work. It's easy to find services advertising this as a feature: http://www.ipfingerprint.com/we_dont_use_cookies.aspx The truth is that cookies aren't that great for tracking. People want to know your activity across browsers and devices. That requires using additional information like phone unique identifier (sent by apps), website logins, billing address fields, coupon usage, and so on. That information can be tied together to track you. You're not going to be able to prevent that kind of tracking by messing with cookies.

If a friend and I alternate driving each other, we've still made a financial transaction and are competing with taxis. It's just a barter based transaction.

You're falsely assuming they want average. They probably want excellent service only. If you want to ensure people only get excellent service, you're going to have to have a harsh cutoff built into the system somewhere.

I suppose this is a problem, but we have to be realistic here. The FBI has failed repeatedly to complete large software projects. They have trouble handling even clear-cut data. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Case_File

Google's cars already have some social interactions like this built in. If it's at a 4 way intersection with stop signs and people aren't obeying the rules to let it through, it will eventually assert itself just like a human driver would. Any defensive behavior a human does is programmable. They're all fairly simple when you get right down to it.

This reads like a press release from IEEE-USA. It doesn't sound like they have any clue why the employment numbers have changed, but they want to complain about visas.

There is definitely less risk taking, but there is a big issue of perception. Things just don't seem mind blowing after a while, even if there is tons of work left to be done in that area. You see this again and again: cars got boring, planes got boring, nuclear energy got boring, space flight got boring. Everything gets boring eventually. Most computing related areas have lost their cultural edge. It's hard to pitch things as being innovative, even if they really are, and have people buy the idea.