Want to not sleep tonight? Read SCP-1981.

These records would seem to be responsive to a proper FOIA request, and if the government already has already-paid-for access to the records, they would be required to pony up those records at the cost of duplication (which would arguably get around the third-party fees this company would charge).

Why they didn't just give all this stuff to Google is beyond me. I'm sure they'd love to have a project like this, and they'd probably make it publicly available for the price of ads.

How do we know that the SCP Foundation wasn't already aware of this object, and the whole tunneling project wasn't actually a cover for securing it? Rest assured that whatever "it" is, "they" have a suitably mundane explanation already prepared.

Maybe they found the AllSpice.

The summary actually isn't spot on, because Lee was appointed as the deputy director. She will be the "acting director" until the President appoints a new director and the Senate confirms him or her.

There is actually a concern that this appointment is not valid, because the law requires that the deputy director be appointed by the Secretary of Commerce after being nominated by the USPTO director. We don't actually have a USPTO director currently, so it's not clear from where the authority for this appointment is derived.

Why are these pages even indexed? Wouldn't it make more sense to just expunge them from the database (perhaps by hostname or even domain name as appropriate) rather than keep them around waiting for someone to figure out a way to trick Google into retrieving them?

A preliminary amendment filed on the filing date along with the application can avoid excess claims fees. In other words, they filed a continuation that included claims 1-154 (because a continuation is supposed to have all the same stuff that the parent has, and this ensures that there is written description support for the parent's original claims in the child case), but then they amended the claims on the same day to cancel those claims and only present claims 155-175 (21 claims). So they owed us $80 for one excess dependent claim, which they paid.

Also, there are ways to submit third party prior art submissions into an application. You would have until 5/28/2014 (six months after publication) to submit such prior art. There's even a fee exemption if you file only one such submission and it has three or fewer documents listed. This is a much better idea than trying to contact the examiner directly, since they are forbidden from discussing the application with an unauthorized party.

But what if it does leave a residue? And what if that residue - chemically inert, apparently - remains in the body indefinitely? And what if you then go outside in a cold day, and that residue drops below 29 C in your extremities?

When's the last time you saw a 747 with that totally swank wood trim on the outside?

You forgot to factor in the cost of the microscope you'll need to see any additional detail at 4k on a 39" screen.

Yeah, those old arcade games did always have a lot of problems with burn-in.

Obligatory Spaceballs

I'm sure Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) doesn't get her news from Fox, and she's plenty afraid. So while Fox likely amplifies the prompting for panic, I think its origin is somewhere else.

This is true - their clever acronym isn't that clever, because the point of this is as a password replacement, not as a human/computer distinguisher. They explain this down in the text, but the title throws you off because it's so poorly chosen.

Presumably, in a real-world scenario, you give your own labels when you register for an account. This would hopefully mean you would form a persistent correlation between the labels and the images. But their multicolor inkblots are so indistinct from each other that I think I would have difficulty labeling each image in the first place.