A friend of mine recently decided to enter school, not having pursued any secondary education after high school. He asked for my help with prep for a math placement exam, not wanting to waste his money and time on remedial courses that would not have even counted as credits toward his degree. If this kind of 'corporate education' was more established at the time, he could have spent some money, worked his ass off, and placed higher on the placement test. Consider this small course list a 'beta' for this type of education.

Your post sums up all the things that are wrong in the popular mind, and exactly why research budgets are falling at a time when they need to be drastically expanded.

Furthermore, it's rather arrogant to diminish the very deserving accomplishments of others just because you simply lack the imagination to think past today. If you don't find any use to it, don't use it. This developer felt it was necessary/cool/practical/etc. to put Ubuntu on a Kindle. This is basically THE tenet that guides software development by individuals. You develop what you use and keep to yourself re: the things you don't use.

It's Not That Simpleâ.

Besides, you're ignoring the point. The real issue here is highlighted by this passage:

But now the IAAF claim that they want to conduct further tests to see if 'she may have a rare medical condition that gives her an unfair advantage.'

In a world where people can change their identities at will (transsexualism, etc.), or otherwise, what changes need to be made to the outdated simple classifications?

And additionally, the obnoxious notion of "fairness" further complicates the issue.

Well, my favorite way to think about 3+1 spacetime as a relatively inexperienced student is as a "loaf" of bread (a la The Elegant Universe). If a "slice" of the loaf contains the 3 conventional space dimensions, and different slices represent different placement in time, then you have a basis for any particular event (4 coordinates that allow you to locate it perfectly).

Perhaps a second dimension of 'time' (which is a slightly incorrect notion, as far as I understand) allows another degree of freedom (like the Copenhagen interpretation)?.

On an unrelated note, this guy is from UMCP, that's sweet!

Distributing a lot of small reactors sounds like a logistical nightmare. Imagine the power draw when the Death Star actually intends to fire. Is it easier to lay the wire and controls necessary to manage that from one reactor, or several?

Not to mention that by assuming the reactors are nuclear, taking down the Death Star might be even easier. More reactors, less security, I'd think it'd be easier to slip an infiltrator in to sabotage one of them.

This article is garbage. See below:

Ah because slow light is complete science fiction, of course!

Speak for yourself and stop fixing what's not broken.

While there might be a few isolated cases where it could be useful, I'm not sure what they are.

That's generally how R&D goes. How many railgun rifles are soldiers (or boats or whatever) equipped with, versus the amount of money spent playing with them?

For any given idea, SOMEBODY SOMEWHERE has an interest/use in/for it.

If it was a privatized company, nobody would care. Companies (coughgooglecough) develop with free reins all the time, to allow their employees to explore new ideas. But when you're talking about gov't funds...it's a whole different ballgame, I suppose.

I'm not a doctor/chemist/etc., but iirc, HCl is important in prescription drugs for delivery, because of it's membrane transport properties. Or something.

It's attached to a LOT of prescription medications, I do know that.

While I agree...

Sometimes, the difference between good work and great work is satisfaction or lack thereof.

I imagine the guys at NASA haven't been thinking "well gosh, we sure got lucky with it lasting that long." It's probably something along the lines of "OK, but how much further could we go?"