Maybe I'm too much into classical computing (a sequential/structured/OO programmer since 1994) but I.JUST.DON'T.GET the governing principle behind quantum computing. I don't understand how you'd write programs for it, and in what kind of languages. And how they'd look like.

Can someone who can relate please recommend a book/article/video/movie/person-to-talk-to to make things clearer for the programmer in me?

I'm based in Germany and we order from Amazon on a daily basis. I can't remember the last time I received a package with plastics. EVERY SINGLE PACKAGE we get is made of recycled cardboard, and the filling (if any) is recycled paper, which we put into the appropriate recycling bins.

So, I am really amazed at this report. Maybe things are different in the US? Perhaps Amazon really has to change what they send out based on local laws, which, in turn, means this is a US problem and not an Amazon problem?

Oh, how we (the Germans) like to know best. It's a super-annoying trait, and as a scientist it is abhorring to have to endure that. And that is the issue I'm having with our government(s) (all of them since I was born): If proper scientific results on a topic are considered at all, they are cherry-picked and then presented as 'fact'.

But what is even more depressing is that there is no open-ended public discussion on any topic anyway. Every member of whichever party already knows best, and the first uttering of something which might be a political course often decides the official line. It's sad.

Then again, there are so many worse places to live, so... well. Bitching and moaning.

Actually, 15k is a joke compared to what a house costs here in Germany. A standard one-family stand-alone house in the suburbs of Munich will currently cost you about 1.5 - 2 million Euros (which is, currently, about the same in USD). I have no clue whether we are even allowed to drill here (probably not), but that is not a prohibitive cost. Right now, we are all trying to get solar power installed on our roofs, partly because of cost, and partly because the government doesn't get to dictate how we use it.

This is so obvious that it is amazing it took so long to point this out at that level.

(Most) human beings suck at writing good code - so, the more help we can get from the language we use the better.

Is it possible to write good code in C? Sure! Its just way harder than doing the same thing in Java or .

I wish things wouldn't turn so... IDEOLOGICAL once a programming language is involved.

The reason this works is that Valve forked Wine to create Proton, which runs all those games. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but its emulation alright.

[Citation Needed]

SCNR

I do agree with your evaluation. I just don't think eliminating a 2-party-system will help. I'm from Germany and we do not have a 2-party-system, yet still we see the same kind of left-vs.-right propaganda that you are describing (and, incidentally, with the same skew to the left as you see). It crosses party boundaries. It's like the human race is only able to perceive things in black and white. I am at a loss at what to do.

It seems to me that you need the languages with the right features to be able to implement good tool support. Consider the excellent IDEs that have been created for Java (Eclipse, IDEA, NetBeans) with extremely advanced refactoring capabilities, code navigation, and inline compilation with meaningful error messages. Such support requires the ability to do static analysis, which you can't do properly in some of the newly popular languages like JavaScript.

USB plugs only fit in after they are observed, Before that, they are in superposition. See http://www.funnyjunk.com/funny_pictures/4555650/The+Quantum+state+of+a+USB/ for an explanation.

The article seems to imply that the humanities are not science, but helping the real science (and lists engineering, of all things). I completely disagree!

Science is a way of thinking, an approach --- you can and must apply it to everything: Humanities as well as Natural Sciences as well as Engineering. It includes rigorous work, sceptical thinking, an open mind, etc. --- and it is necessary for ALL scientists to follow, regardless of their field.

Here's the rub. A lot of people show up at the doctor for things which will take n days to go away - with or without treatment. The common cold, for example. They won't accept NOT getting any prescription and will hop from doctor to doctor until they get one.

Now the best thing would be educating the public about this issue. This is very, very hard to do. Barring that, it is actually better for the patients and cheaper to just prescribe placebos - they DO work in this case! (up to the placebo effect, as any other medicine would).

Unfortunately there is another issue involved: Most placebos (at least in Germany) are homeopatic. This lends credibility to the whole homeopatic industry, and THEY are nothing but quacks. And THAT is a bad thing.

So - either way you lose.

US != World

But in general, "the media" loves to report stuff like this, normally completely without citations of course.

Apparently, not so bad: http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn16058-prophesy-of-economic-collapse-coming-true.html

I have not read the 1972 book, but I think the main point was that economic growth has to stop at some point (because the planet won't support it) and we have to go for a steady-state economy. The problem with that is, while it is perfectly possible to do, it apparently still just doesn't fit into the heads of the people responsible.