Some actually might. For some people cheating is less about the physical exchange than the emotional - they might appreciate it if their men can get their physical needs attended to without the risk of the emotional attachment, baby making or STDs for that matter. If however the man gets his needs attended to by some random hookup, that woman may want to have that emotional connection or create a family bond through an unintended (for him) pregnancy or bring home some microscopic invaders.

Hell, the troops are going to get their jones off one way or another so the options to a government sanctioned brothel would be infidelity or an unsanctioned brothel. That could even be a security concern - unsanctioned brothels could be a nasty attack vector on troops - give the ladies at the local unsanctioned brothels some HIV (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/28/SheMayLookCleanBut.jpg) and let the disease do their work.

From the almighty Wikipedia:

See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmospheric_escape#Significance_of_solar_winds

I would also think that solar winds would be a steady source of hydrogen atoms as it consists largely of hydrogen ions (also known as protons (H+)). Once in the atmosphere they would capture electrons to become stable hydrogen. This has been detected on the moon for instance (only 10% of the solar wind ions deflect off the moon and 90% become embedded in the lunar surface and become neutral hydrogen atoms by picking up free electrons). Since Venus has very little water (approximately .002% of the atmosphere versus .40% for earth's atmosphere), apparently the stripping the by solar winds is at least as great as the contributed hydrogen.

If we're going to get into the world of fantasy, I would think that setting up a sun-facing device that created a weak magnetic field far enough out in front of Venus that was strong enough to slow the rain of protons but not deflect them, could result in Venus gradually building up a water canopy . . .

There's no evidence that GZ accosted anyone. There is substantial evidence that a TM attacked GZ without provocation (GZ's action of following TM from a distance is not legally cognizable as such) and brutally attacked GZ using the sidewalk as his weapon. TM was not merely "armed only with skittles" as the prosecution argued - the cement instrument is a blunt object and it doesn't matter under the law whether the blunt object is being forcefully applied to a victim's head or their head forcefully applied to the blunt object. TM also pounded GZ's face resulting in a black eye and broken nose. TM threatened to kill GZ and was acting accordingly. GZ had the right to defend his life. Period. Full stop.

Someone better let Joe Biden in on this . . . He's a big believer in firing warning shots:

Read more: http://politicaloutcast.com/2013/05/man-takes-bidens-warning-shot-advice-and-has-his-guns-confiscated/#ixzz2Z2VIJ0A3

One of the things that courts consider when looking at whether communication evidence should be suppressed under the 4th is the measures that the person took to keep the communication private - in short, is there an expectation of privacy? While Duck Duck Go's search engine does not provide perfect opacity, it does provide evidence that you intended to keep your search request private and that you had an expectation of privacy that is worth protection.

As near as I can tell we already are - the latest Gallup poll says that only 10% of Americans have confidence in Congress and 80% think that Congress is doing serious damage to our country. Our government is anything but representative of the will of the people.

Yeah, anytime someone claims we live in a representative democracy, I point to Congress's approval rating. BTW, the latest Gallup poll shows that only 10% of Americans have confidence in our Congress and 80% feel they are doing serious harm to our country.

This is known as the Coolidge Effect, after a joke that went around about President Calvin Coolidge:

It is also the reason why high availability of internet porn may be having negative consequences on the male mind - in nature we wouldn't have an unlimited supply of different females to get it on with and our brain doesn't differentiate between the excitement generated from porn and the real thing. See the TED talk on "The Great Porn Experiment" and Your Brain on Porn.

Apparently, this test would disqualify four of the Supreme Court justices from being able to vote. (See Heller v. District of Columbia decision).

There's a White House petition set up to request the matter be dropped. The FBI & the DOJ are both executive branch offices. Hit the petition to help Deric Lostutter - stop the senseless persecution of someone who helped justice get done!

See: https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/drop-investigation-against-deric-lostutter-aka-kyanonymous/jdLfBh1z

LOL. Well, glad you have a sense of humor about it. I didn't take any offense and your's was a more detailed source so I would have understood if they chose your submission. Take care.

See: http://slashdot.org/submission/2681021/3d-printers-good-for-saving-lives-not-just-printing-guns

See: http://slashdot.org/submission/2681021/3d-printers-good-for-saving-lives-not-just-printing-guns

And he wasn't a new born baby. He was three months old. However, your link is more informative than the other article on the subject.

It'd be a very poor tradeoff between power and payload. You'd need to increase the battery size and motor size to offset the increased weight from the solar cell and charging electronics. Both of the modifications will increase weight further and reduce your flight time more than the in-flight recharging could possibly increase it - not to the mention the loss of payload storage space for sensors. If you're looking to recharge in the field, just have a rechargeable Lithium Ion battery on the UAV with a large solar cell recharge unit carried by the pilot.

The putative reason for designating the Works and Drano "bombs" and the dry ice "bomb as criminal destructive devices is to stop terrorism, but it's little more than laziness on the part of legislatures. Objects shouldn't be criminalized, only what you intend to do or in-fact do with them. Even if one could argue that objects themselves should be outlawed, there has to be some sort of proportionality that defines the punishment based on it's destructive potential (a device made of a plastic bottle than can contain 80-120 psi in a volume of 2 liters or less like a soda bottle is of little use to terrorist. However, a destructive device using something like an air compressor shell is something different, as that can contain 250 or more psi in a metallic shrapnel creating body which has a volume of 8-16 liters. That has real destructive capability.).

Personally, I think if you blow up your own beater car in an empty field and do no other harm? It shouldn't be illegal (with littering charges if they leave the burnt carcass behind instead of properly disposing of it). But if you harm someone else then throw the book at 'em. A kid blowing-out a soda bottle in their back yard may be due a lecture but a kid destroying a neighbor's mailbox should be forced to pay restitution and do community service and perhaps should be into a Summer science program to teach them some respect for the chemistry and forces involved. Putting them in jail will probably lead to them sharing the wealth of their knowledge with other kids who will find new and ingenious ways of using that knowledge for mischievous ends . . .Unfortunately, in the criminal justice system, the only tool they seem to have is to imprison people and if the only tool you have is a hammer then everything looks like a nail. A damn shame really as we're criminalizing ingenuity and smothering our children's potential with fear.