I really like articles which make large claims (here "a potentially history-altering nuclear first-strike capability") without spending the minimum of thought on them.
A first strike capability encompasses disabling the second strike capability of the opponent. I would be interested to learn how a rather large and slow plane would be able to find all the space-radars switched off so no one noticed the fleet of planes flying two hours through outer space, the early warning system not detecting re-entry of the warheads, and all the nuclear subs in the ports.
Very obviously the author of the article is privy to some information not about space planes but mind-altering capabilities of the Russians. I propose he gets a visits from the nice guys at CIA.

I am a bit surprised about the belief that AIs (or machine learning) will solve all problems given enough data.
What do you think a neural net would have learned to do if trained to use VW's "AdBlue" as efficiently as possible but still to pass the NHTSA conformance test?
Who would you blame then? After all the constraints look reasonable. Would you want to be the engineer sued because he did not predict the neural net might learn something illegal?

Plus, there is obviously a problem with the way Tesla gathers its training data. If Elon Musk promotes a dashcam video taken by the killed driver earlier where the driver admits insufficient attention to the road (the cutting-in vehicle was in front of the driver and clearly visible), people might well take this as encouragement to not pay attention.

Plus, what I am missing is a comparison with the ratio in the overall populace. I.e. if four times as many arabian/muslim people were studing STEMM (last "M" for medicine) than Islamic Studies, then actually people studying Islam would be twice as likely to become terrorist.

It is OK if the Tony Blair Faith Foundation wants to defend faith. But they should at least include basic statistical facts before writing articles.

Changing the default search provider happens quite often and does not need what this article describes i.e. one plugin using facilities of another. It is also easily correctable by *gasp* clicking on the looking glass icon next to the search bar and choosing your old search provider.

Please return your nerd card per express e-mail.

I thought the general three body problem was already intractable. Now they did it for 62?

Actually the open discussion/review page is an even better read as it presents counter and counter-counter arguments. For example several Dutch and English scientist consider the predictions of the paper not impossible but on the upper tail of the probability curve (http://www.atmos-chem-phys-discuss.net/15/C6867/2015/acpd-15-C6867-2015-supplement.pdf)
Now, I am no climate scientist (nor do I have time to read all the references) so I cannot say who is more right but at least it seems to indicate that the large & quick effects predicted in the paper are probably not universally accepted as correct.

The "retaining privacy" part of the posting's title only refers to the ability to prevent some websites to be listed. Everything else is public. From the FAQ:

• How much of my browsing data does Eyebrowse collect?

  Eyebrowse only collects data from the domains that you give it permission to collect. ...

• Is the data I put on my Eyebrowse feed public?

  Yes. ....

• Exactly what fields are collected with each visit?

  From every visit that is collected from Eyebrowse, we collect the time you entered the page and the time you leave the page. From the webpage, we store the url, [....] . Finally, the visit is associated with your Eyebrowse account. ...

They specifically warn that even an anonymous eyebrowse account can be potentially tracked back to a user by his browsing behaviour. It appears the title of the posting promises more than the mechanism keeps. No wonder for a webservice promising to get you in touch with like-minded (or -browsing) people.

The German CCC (Chaos Computer Club) did this already 2004 and went on to "publish" the finger print[sorry, in German only] of the then German minister of the interior tele-photoed of a glas used during a press conference.

So what is new now? Using a 3D printer instead of a laser printer?

Since when are Chat-Bots Ro-Bots? Did I miss something about ELIZA being the first femal robot?

According to TFA (yes, I know, I am not supposed to read it) this could be caused by the anonymous messaging application Ricochet which apparently creates a hidden service for each user.
Would have expected that that information was mentioned in the summary.

To my knowledge it is even worse. You need to decouple the power grid of the individual parts of the IC against each other as well as the power supply (often also on chip for microcontrollers). From what I learned in a previous job most of the empty space(*) on current microcontroller dies is converted into capacitance to buffer the effects of power draw by switching transistors. And discussions sounded as if that was already becoming a limiting factor, so more capacitance (by attaching super capacitors on top of the die) could help.
But I am not an analog guy so I can't comment on whether the bad AC characteristics mentioned in another post will prevent such usage.

(*)= There is quite a bit of empty space on silicon dies due to the fact that a) the layout programs are not perfect (or rather the problem of routing the signal lines on the existing metal layers is not solvable without leaving some silicon empty) and b) design rules requiring certain areas to be empty (not sure they are allowed to be filled with capacitance then).

Well, I also wondered what Amazon's Cloud was doing in the drone example (see this figure from the cited article). It turns out it does the voice recognition (apparently with Amazon's "Alexa" service).

BTW, the drone article (didn't read the babyphone one) gives a step-by-step instruction how to setup the different programs. Could be useful also to others wanting to use speech recognition for whatever. Although, given the example phrases in the article such as "Alexa talk to Drone”, “Command Launch”, “Go forward 10 feet” (especially the last one) I wonder whether Alexa can do grammar or whether one has to generate a new command for each different amount of feet to move.

That's why you should read the real article and not the bad copy gizmodo created.

Given that normal (one-pane) glas has a transmittance of about 90% that would mean there was basically no reflection or absorption left and nearly all light would have to pass undisturbed. Quite some claim which I cannot find justified by the paper where the closest thing to glass I can find is Silicion Nitride (which apparently starts with only 80% transmittance) and even for that they only show a 6% increase and only postulate that 10% (for silicon nitride) might be theoretically possible.

Obviously another case of journalists hyping science results (without even switching on their own brain).