I've found that often times, people who go through life thinking that everyone else is an asshole, often turn out to be the assholes themselves.

It'd be just as fine if you did read 'super' as 'sugar' : http://news.discovery.com/tech/sweet-sugar-batteries-120927.htm

Discussion: http://hardware.slashdot.org/story/12/09/28/234255/sugar-batteries-could-store-20-more-energy-than-li-ions

Instead of spending millions on pest control and mitigation, we should spend those dollars on marketing, showing the benefits of using these snails as a valid food source. Once enough people perceive them to be edible, or better yet, desirable, then the problem solves itself to the benefit of our food production system.

Collectively speaking, we Americans have had the luxury of eating premier proteins (beef, chicken, pork) for so long that we've become spoiled and will have a hard time getting over the 'yuck factor' involved here.

I'm surprised that no one has made (or at least, made public) an AR lower using Direct Metal Laser Sintering. As others have mentioned, the stress on the lower receiver isn't terribly great, so I would think DMLS lower's would perform fine?

So,let me get this straight. Instead of inventing something in the US, you recommend taking it to China, where "Their economy is driven because they copy, then improve, in an iterative process without regard for intellectual property considerations..."

Truly you have a dizzying intellect.

It's not really 'weird instances'... you're describing Jeavon's Paradox

In a nutshell, it states that increased efficiency of a resource actually increases the depletion of said resource. e.g, as MPG of cars increases via efficiency, more people will accept longer commutes, resulting in a net increase in the use of fuel.

Exactly this. If anyone wants a great read, check out :The Big Scrum: How Teddy Roosevelt Saved Football

FTS: "In its infancy during the late nineteenth century, the game of football was still a work in progress that only remotely resembled the sport millions follow today. There was no common agreement about many of the game’s basic rules, and it was incredibly violent and extremely dangerous. An American version of rugby, this new game grew popular even as the number of casualties rose. Numerous young men were badly injured and dozens died playing football in highly publicized incidents, often at America’s top prep schools and colleges."

Try this: Superhuman AI solves the protein folding problem, allowing it to build organic (protein) nanobots which could then assemble other devices. The AI is connected to the internet, so it places orders for DNA strings from several online labs. (To the workers, they would have no idea what the purpose is; it would just look like all the other 'experimental orders' they process.)

AI doesn't even have to be malicious in order for it to become catastrophic to everything else. Let's say the AI was designed for something ridiculously mundane, like "design the most efficient paperweight possible" without any additional controls or parameters. So it hijacks all the resources it can - CPU power, Energy, from every system across the globe to achieve what it was programmed to do. Humans weren't even a factor in its process.

Far Fetched? You bet. We aren't anywhere near being able to create this today.

But to think that we humans will always be smarter or faster than the computers is dangerous thinking.

Slightly off topic but interesting to Elite fans... Braben used the Fibonacci Sequence to create those "reproduciple sequence of numbers". (all the stars, locations, planet names, etc)

Here's some barely-better-than-napkin math on how long $5 Million will last you if that's your only income: YMMV depending on where you live (state taxes) and your investment strategy or risk tolerance.

You just made $5,000,000. Awesome! Now, depending where you live, capital gains and income taxes make about 35% of that go away.

You're now down to $ 3.25 Million, nothing to sneeze at.

Next, we need to invest it fairly conservatively, in dividend-distributing vehicles. Let's call the return $6% annual. So now you're making $195K just for enjoying life and watching the grass grow.

However, you need to account for future cost-of-living increases. Generally speaking, we're told to expect a 3% cost of living increase.. so you need to fund half of that 6% investment into your investment principal.

...So that $5 Million windfall should give you the equivalent of about $100,000 per year for the rest of your life, if you manage it wisely.

As to whether or that is "enough" - many factors come into play. $100K per year is not enough to support a family and home ownership in many parts of the country and I would recommend some level of prudence.

As to the original question.. my advice for the entrepreneur? Take the "bird in the hand", invest the $5 million as laid out above, and consider any job you take (or starting another company) as always having a $100K per year kicker. Certainly enough to boost you to retirement much earlier than without...

I don't have points or I'd mod up the professor. Monolithic domes are noted to be very energy efficient, and can withstand natural disasters quite well - earthquake / fire / wind. Plus they look cool :)

Mod parent up. Especially the "economics" part of Home-Ec. Yes, the sciences and arts are important in an education, but so are things like managing a household budget, basic nutrition, cooking (healthy and inexpensive food), simple home repair, etc.

No wonder we have a population in debt when we don't even teach our kids how to manage *life*.

Queue the 'But it's the parents' job - don't tell me how to raise my kids!' responses. You know what? You are right. We should be teaching our own kids... but we (categorically) are not.

I would suggest.. maybe.. yes. Let the shareholders lose their investments.

This would bring an ugly bloodletting the first time or two that a corporation went through this. And then shareholders would start placing their money into companies with reputable management teams.

It would be ugly in the short term, but far better for business and the economy in the long term.

From what I've read, Singulatarians take this very seriously. The line of thinking is that the danger of an AI damaging us humans is very possible, and the best way to prevent it is to carefully understand said danger. We should do what we can to try to build AI properly by adding in as many preventative measures as possible. Will those preventative measures work? Given that we don't understand AI yet, no on can really say - but to think that we should just let the chips unfold as they may would be pretty irresponsible.

Personally, I believe the the singularity is an eventuality, failing some sort of technological or societal disruption. Perhaps the timeframe posed by Kurzweil is optimistic, but someday, yes, machines will become faster and more powerful than humans. You can call it AI if you want, or just brute force.

To think that this wont happen *ever* is probably a bit myopic or arrogant. History is filled with predictions based on current technology and understanding that were eventually proved wrong.

Unfortunately, rights surrounding the raising of children can't be as simple as you think they are.

Everyone else 'gets the kids that you raised' when you do an in adequate job in preparing them for life. Certainly, not in every case, but you can probably link higher incidents of poverty, crime, teen pregnancy, and maybe a dozen more undesired outcomes of which a person's course in life was directed fairly early on in life because of poor parenting.