No kidding, anyone who's serious about fusion should be buying their stock right now and putting their money where their mouth is.

I did just that last time they announced another advance on this project a few years ago. Ironically, that LMT purchase has proven to be the single best performing stock in my portfolio since then (obviously for unrelated reasons).

And yes, I've bought more LMT on today's announcement. It's a long-term gamble, and most people on the stock market today aren't interested in long term, so you won't see much of it on the large scale, but yeah... I'll be eagerly awaiting the dough to roll in.

Just buy some LMT stock, that'll keep you excited for any future news on this.

If only we had magical precognition powers telling us which approach is going to work in advance, we could save money by only funding that approach and ignoring all the rest.

In the meantime, though, we have to invest in different approaches and hope that at least one of them produces something useful.

There is a lot of ground between a theoretical breakthrough, an experimental device, a prototype, and a production unit. But any stage in that process is way more than "nothing".

In any case, the fact that they're not promising a working reactor tomorrow is exactly why you know that this has a good chance of being valid. Beyond that, I would leave it to the experts in the field (including those hired by any potential investors) to determine how close they actually are.

At least two Supreme Court justices of our era (Rehnquist and Scalia) disagree with you on that.

"An entirely separate and important philosophical question is whether occasional presidential excesses and judicial restraint in wartime are desirable or undesirable. In one sense, this question is very largely academic. There is no reason to think that future wartime presidents will act differently from Lincoln, Wilson, or Roosevelt, or that future Justices of the Supreme Court will decide questions differently than their predecessors."

"The Supreme Court's Korematsu decision upholding the internment of Japanese Americans was wrong, but it could happen again in war time."

And if you'd think that people today wouldn't stand for it, you're wrong, too. Some people not only would do that all over again, they write books to justify it and claim that the same argument also applies in the "War on Terror". These are usually the same kind of people who are fond of the phrase "constitution is not a suicide pact" (by which they mean that it can be ignored at will if they feel sufficiently threatened).

Now, don't get me wrong. I'm not saying that things haven't improved in US in that department since WW2. They did, and public opinion would not be so easily swayed today (in WW2, internment was virtually uncontroversial). But it's far from a settled thing, as well, both legally and in terms of public support, and we have to remain on guard against repeat attempts.

What do you mean, "illegally"? Korematsu v. United States has not been overturned, so it's still a binding precedent that the president of the United States can unilaterally confine thousands of people to concentration camps with a stroke of his pen.

Oh, and apologies and reparations? Those are not legally binding, sorry.

There's plenty of material available on collaboration of various nations inhabiting the Soviet Union with the Nazis, including Russians. But ultimately, the collaborators were all wrong in one thing: they assumed that because their government lies to them about everything, it also lies about how bad the Nazi are. Look up "Generalplan Ost" for details.

Compared to 1950's America, the America of today is less "socialist", not more. In 1953, you'd pay 48% personal income tax on all income above $12k (in 2013 adjusted dollars, this is ~$100k), and 90% on income above $100k (~$860k in 2013 dollars).

It was also the time when Gini (economic inequality) index, arguably one of the best metrics of "socialism", was at one of the lowest points ever in US history, only matched later in 70s - it was 35 then. Today, it's over 45, and growing. For comparison, UK has Gini of 34 - so US in 1950's was as socialist as UK today.

It will be doing just that for many people by default out of the box in the future - in Win8.1+, OneDrive is the default save location.

Of course, if we're going to the times before the actual Space Race, then Soviets similarly had Tsiolkovsky.

In most areas of Russia that actually have wolves and bears, there are no grocery stores.

OTOH, the areas that do have grocery stores, are awfully short on wolves and bears. And most other wildlife, actually. When I lived in Russia, I never saw a squirrel outside of pictures in books. The first time I saw a live one was in Canada.

Perl (5/6)?

There is no other dimension. They are two related but different languages, so treat them like e.g. C# and Java.

You're thinking about C++Builder. They are two different products, even if they happen to be owned by the same company, and have some compatibility in terms of using libraries across two languages.

It's mostly just you.

With respect to different versions not being backwards compatible, it's more of a branding issue. There are two languages. One is Python 2, the other is Python 3. Within each of those, there's backwards compatibility, but between them, they're not compatible in general (though with some care it's possible to write code that works in both, and with some more care it'll even do the same thing - but you'd best leave that to library writers...). For your own project, pick one and stick to it. For other people's code, you might need both 2 and 3, but you should only need one version of each.