There are certain tecnologies that are so compelling that it would be absurd to avoid them - the use of fire, cooking, clothes, knives etc, but the mobile phone doesn't even come close. I think the people who keep coming up with this sort of hype, have something they want to sell, and I have no confidence in what they have to tell us.

(I assume you meant no measurable goals?) The point is that it has been very difficult to reach agreement on even the most basic principles until the Paris agreement - now there is agreement globally that climate change is real, that it has alot to do our CO2 emissions, and that something can and must be done. This is hugely important, politically; and as far obligations and binding agreements - who is going to punish those who violate the agreement? When the political agreement is a fragile as this, there is little sense in adding the aggravation of "binding obligations", however symbolic, to the equation.

Reaching any global, political agreement is a very slow, frustrating process, and the joyful surprise is that China are taking this very serious and seem to be taking the lead. Another very positive surprise is how American industry and individual states seem determind to fulfil the Paris agreement, no matter what Trump says. You may call it toothless and pointless, but it seems to have sent out a signal that is going to be followed, regardless.

No. By choosing to portray a person as completely evil, rather than criticising their actions, policies opinions etc, you make your whole statement unbelievable. I am no fan of Putin, and he doesn't seem bashful when it comes to unsavoury methods, but considering that Russia is overrun by organised crime, rightwing extremists etc, perhaps he is less bad than many others would be. He certainly seems to be very popular, so it could be that a majority of Russians actually want his style of leadership. Also, I think it is downright childish to say that "he can't stand a successful and prosperous West"; Western countries in general have seen modest economical growth in recent decades, while China, India and Russia, among others have seen massive groth rates, so what is there to envy? But he has seen how the West, and in particular the US, have been struggling financially and politically, culminating in absurdities like Trump and Brexit, so he feel emboldened and exploits the situation. Wouldn't the US have done the same? In fact, wasn't that exactly what you guys did throughout the Cold War? And when Gorbachev started on his reform policies, is it not true that Reagan saw his chance to push things over, so he could boast that he had "destroyed Communism" and ended the Cold War? What we see in Russia today has a lot to do with the fact that Gorbachev's reform failed, and Yeltsin gave away state assets to corrupt officials. The Western Powers have a history of meddling and then suffering the consequences, and still we haven't learned.

Not Cancer: it was born on the 3rd of March 1999, so it is an Aries. And Redhat were born as a public company on 11th of August 1999, so again not Cancer, but Leo.

- and we will have Kibo back! (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Parry)

Good joke, of course, but more seriously, we shouldn't be too dismissive of the role played by any major part of the ecosystems, when we don't fully understand the situation. Just as a rather well reported example, there are several indications that the rise in allergies may have a lot to do with the elimination of internal parasites.

Well, obviously they are afraid that there will be a lot of drones flying very slowly along the grassy verges of roads.

Well, strictly speaking it is "Parts of capitalism and the free market actually work - sometimes". Just like "Parts of socialism and market regulation actually work, sometimes". It is delusional to think that there is one and only one optimal way running the world, which will work universally across time and space. Socialism sums up quite neatly what society is all about: the sharing of things that are beneficial to everybody, the equality of rights etc. Capitalism represents what motivates the individual. Neither can work without the other, and there is no static, perfect balance between the two - it has to change dynamically all the time, otherwise society will stagnate.

Hmm, let me guess: dark chocolate gives you palpitations and sleeplessness, whereas prunes give you diarrhea. Am I on the right track?

Very true, but how can we solve the problems in a way that is not open to easy, electoral fraud, while at the same avoiding the problems with paper ballots - especially the issues causing invalid ballots? Perhaps a scheme similar to the way lottery tickets work, but anonymously; perhaps something where the machine stores the vote together with some sort of checksum - and then prints out two (anonymised) copies that are given to an official representative from each party. In case of a contest, a recount can be made which compares the ballots kept by each party. Unlike lottery tickets, the voter shouldn't get to keep a copy, and the printed information shouldn't readily reveal the actual vote.

Autism is a very wide spectrum of personality disroders, from the barely noticeable, slightly eccentric to the severely disabling. We aren't all drooling and rocking in a corner, you know, but what we all have in common is diminished ability to take part in social interactions, and perhaps as a way of compensating for this, an ability to concentrate more deeply than most people. Many of us are able to learn how to handle social situations, although I personally have never learned to fully enjoy being around a lot of people. Somewhat counterintuitively, perhaps, I think many with ASD like being the centre of attention when they are in a crowd - it gives you the feeling of being in control of your situation.

About this guy - I can understand easily enough how he can have hacked his way into something sensitive without quite understanding the implications; I have been there myself, in a sense: you do something that shuts out the world and gives you peace, and you know that you have no intentions of causing harm or mischief in any way. And to many autists, it is very hard to see things from somebody else's perspective - I have learned to do it, but some simply don't. My grandson is more severely affected than me, and he fails the following test:

You play with two dolls, who each have a box for keeping things in. One of them has a thing - say, a coin - which they put into their box; they that dolls leaves. The other doll takes the coin out and puts in their own box, and then the first doll comes back. Then you ask the child - where will the first doll look for the coin? An autistic child will tend to point to the box where they have just seen the coin being placed - they have real difficulty understanding that first doll hasn't seen what happened while they were away. It can be learned, but it just doesn't come natural.

I can't see how it makes sense to prosecute or punish a guy like Lauri Love - Firstly, although he can probably understand why it is regarded as a serious transgression, after it has been explained to him with some care, he is unlikely to have realised it in the situation; in that respect he is not dissimilar to those that commit crime while insane, and punishment is not appropriate. Secondly, punishment is meant to be a manifestation of society's "righteous retribution" - we punish the people who commit crime, because we assume they understand what they are doing; they choose to do what they do for selfish reasons and can be justifiably regarded as enemies of common society. In this case, it can't be regarded as righteous, or certainly not by most people, I think, and thus it would bring the law into disrepute.

Which voting technology is the most secure is secondary, really, when the whole process is fundamentally flawed by the fact that voters can't be bothered to learn the actual facts or even turn up to vote, and when elections are completely overwhelmed by deliberate misinformation campaigns. As it is, it would be fairer to play dice for the presidency. Simpler too, and it might even engage people more.

The problem with cheating is one of what is perceived as socially acceptable, and it isn't limited to cheating with your education. It is the same mechanism that lies behind, say, binge drinking amongst teenagers in UK, low level tax evasion in Denmark, social benefits fraud, using your mobile while driving, corruption etc etc: it has somehow become socially acceptable - "everybody" is doing it. People have somehow persuaded themselves that it doesn't cause real problems, and to address it, somebody has to start telling people that it is not actually acceptable because it does cause real harm.

In the case of exam fraud, the cheater may benefit in the short term, but if it becomes commonplace, then the profession as a whole suffers, and the industries that rely on employing genuinely competent, highly educated people get into trouble. At the moment, Indian university degrees are considered with some skepticism - but the same can happen to American degrees. Basically, it is about trust: it takes surprisingly little effort to break, and it is very hard work to rebuild it.

Yes, I don't understand the editorial line that /. has taken - it is becoming more and more about inflating trivia to make it sound sensational, rather than real news with some thoughtful analysis behind. The thing is, this editorial line frustrates those of us who have been faithful readers for years, adding much of the comment that is actually driving the success of /. - when we submit comments, we do valuable work for the site in generating interest and starting cascades of comments etc, and we don't receive payment in any form. On that background, is it wise of the editors to constantly frustrate us with deceptive headlines? Every time I come across such a story and click on a link to an idiotic, vapid non-story, I get a little closer to simply abandoning /. as inconsequential. That is sad, I think - at on time this community gave name to the 'slashdot effect' (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slashdot_effect), but when has that last happened? Bad editorship is what has eroded the core contributers away - those of us that are still left, stay mostly out of habit.

The original one, which like a lot of things originated in UK. Great Britain was for a very long time at the forefront of invention, and although it may not be as visible now, we are still punching well above our weight, especially in the sciences. It was one of the important reasons there was a British Empire, and it is the reason why China are so very keen on establishing close relation with UK.