You people are idiots looking for an excuse to be outraged.
It's just data, and the question is 'why?'. No one is outraged.

Half the population makes less money then the other half, and looking at the data and trying to see if we can find parity is reasonable.

Why do you think we should ignore this issue?

When though? I find it interesting that it's the afternoon.
Why wait that long to leave for a trip? I would have thought the morning would be worse.
In the rare occasion I need to go somewhere the day before TGiv* I leave at 5-6AM Now I might sleep an extra hour.

*You Heard Me.

I cut everyone in the family who are argumentative*, gets sloppy drunk, and like to fight ut of my holidays.
My families holidays are relaxing and stress free. Family is a two way street. If they can't respect my family and home, then I don't need to invite them over.
Frankly, I don't understand people who put up with the crap.

*I don't mean people I can have a civil discusses with who happen to be arguing a different POV.

That would be shocking, and a first for human beings as a whole. New data indicates what I am doing is wrong? well, I'll just change what I do, said hardly anyone, ever.

Probably not 4 times, and it is not extremely dangerous.

There are trade offs, and I am not second guessing the designers because I don't know all their constraints,

Getting and handling could have been done with the assistance of other countries. No, it would not have lost significant amounts of fuel.

They would need one gram per .5 watt.

It' an alpha emitter tat decays into a less energetic alpha emitter.
so scary.

The thing is coders are underrepresented as we have no reason to be there.

Actually, I would argue that science and technology committees should be populated almost entirely by people who understand science and technology, so to the extent that government is creating policy in those areas, there should be coders among the elected officials.

Except on little endian architectures, where the sky is d3a056#.

Every change means more headaches when the bill goes to reconciliation between the two houses. That’s one of the big disadvantages of a bicameral legislature—there’s a strong disincentive to fixing problems by the time a bill gets out of committee, which means if you’re not on the committee, you usually have little to no say unless the problem with the bill is grave, in which case enough people vote against it (you hope) to keep it from passing, and the committee has to rethink it.

This also points to a serious flaw in the way committees operate. Instead of a committee consisting of everyone with an interest in an issue, with open discussion, the committees are carefully selected groups consisting of a proportional number of members of each party, and are not necessarily the people who are most interested in that particular issue, but rather the people who are ostensibly most interested in the broader topic of the committee (at best). This is pretty much the exact opposite of the way that things should be done, assuming the goal is to actually pass the best, most reasonable bill possible.

So yes, the entire system is pretty much broken from top to bottom, to such a degree that progress is always made in spite of the system, never because of it. And that’s part of the reason so many bills end up being basically prewritten by lobbyists.

"Do you think that a place like, say, Haiti, which has sun, humidity and wind aplenty, but lots of problems getting sanity drinking water couldn't use this technology?"

Yes. Using a Peltier element to essentially produce a solar powered solid state air conditioner is a really inefficient way of purifying water. For small scale desalination or purification where distillation is necessary, a solar still works much better and can be made with much cheaper and available materials. Often you can make one out of scavenged stuff.

Note that it's an award for industrial design, which is an arts (not engineering) program. The inventor is a student at an applied arts school.

Does that change your assessment?

It's because for most places you can make a more efficient, cheaper and more easily scalable version with a bucket, some plastic and a rock. The only drawback is that it's harder to mount on a bike.

Their specific scenario is solved by western court systems in the same way: if you cannot prove, in a reasonable amount of time, that the potentially evil programmer really did write malicious code then you must let her go.

These things are generally implemented very simply, in hardware. There is no memory controller, or memory, or OS. If you want to be really sure, the algorithm is implemented as a mechanical device.

Yes, even those can fail. But hardware failure is a separate problem from software failure.