Uh... how would that be a conspiracy? Planet X and the Sun are conspiring to destroy Earth?

So your point is DON'T be cautious when doing hydrolysis experiments at home?

We're already there. Table salt has warnings on it.

Is the "belching toxic death" thing specific to this type of nuclear reactor, or are you talking about coal?

This is bureaucratic troubles, not partisan politics. No one is opposed to iPS on ideological grounds. Well, no one who is worth considering anyway. iPS aren't made from embryos. ESC are the ones that conservatives hate, that come from fertilized eggs.

Property taxes and rent rising pushes out renters who have lived there a long time. People like their neighbors and work to establish a safe community only to be priced out of it BECAUSE they made it safe. They end up having to move to a more distant neighborhood which is once again unsafe. Now they have to commute further to work and have less money from the move. Moving to a new apartment generally means paying higher rent in cities if you keep the same level of nice neighborhood, so it's likely a step down.

I mean, it sounds reasonable to me. Not compelling enough for me to not move to a gentrifying area (which I have before and don't feel particularly guilty about), but I understand why it upsets some people legitimately. I do think a lot of it is simply entitlement or making excuses for envy. Obviously tipping over someone's car isn't a rational way of trying to keep prices for long-term residents down: people who have already moved in are just going to hire more cops which will increase taxes which will hasten the poorer residents being priced out. No, those idiots were either simply troublemakers or at best angry because they didn't have a nice shiny smartcar while their neighbors did.

Three cars tipped over is "crazy" and a reason to avoid a place? No one was in or under the cars, you realize. There were no deaths or injuries.

You go ahead and stay in your padded cave if that scares you.

I'm still waiting on those claims to come true of 2D printing.

I thought it was "grass" like as in pot. Maybe in French airports, foie gras is a currency you can use to pay for transport. Or do you mean "generally recognized as safe?" Because I'd take safety over... uh... ass or gas.

I must have been actually working last month because I haven't heard about the entanglement-enhanced microscope. Does it do fluorescence microscopy? The was no mention of fluorescence in the article. It sounds like this is just better DIC imaging, which is of limited use in biology. Electron microscopy has (literally) been around since before the internet and has better resolution than anything you're going to get with light. Light microscopy seems to be primarily important today for basic stuff like whole tissue imaging (generally not requiring the resolution described here) or fluorescence microscopy, which it doesn't sound like this microscope can do. Fluorescence is useful because with most applications, you're trying to visualize a small thing in a much much much bigger volume of stuff. Like you're trying to see a protein within a cell within a tissue. Looking at cells with light for a small thing doesn't tell you much, you just see a blur. When the small thing is basically emitting it's own light, as happens sorta with fluorescence, you can see it.

There are also already fluorescence based microscopy techniques which surpass the diffraction limit.

I'm not going to say it doesn't sound useful, since most of the time, you only realize how useful a thing is once you already have it. I'll just say that if the microscope mentioned here doesn't do fluorescence, I can't think of anything one would use it for that they wouldn't be able to do better with EM or fluorescence microscopy.

They're not really mutually exclusive though. You can have a fancy automated house and still have a $5 smoke detector as well.

I mean, I assume Nest devices won't send out predator droids to destroy competing products. Maybe that's an unsafe assumption.

The second definitely does. There doesn't seem to be a straighforward way of getting youtube on the roku 2 though, so lets not hold roku up as an example of doing everything perfectly.

Not every hypothesis needs to be shocking to be reportable. Sure, lots of people could have guessed, but how many people actually proved it?

That sounds like a false dichotomy. Your first bullet point would be true unless some smart engineer figured out how to make it a reasonable size. I hear they have some smart engineers working at google. On your second, you would likely save money on upgrades, not having to replace the whole phone, and probably going longer between upgrades. The third is wild predictions. If the design concept takes off and becomes the standard model, then it's going to save a lot of waste.

Be skeptical, not cynical.

The internet hates everything. Seriously, name one goddamn thing someone on the internet isn't hating on. ANYTHING!!!! Sex, beer, hip hop, music that ISN'T hip hop, air, the moon... there's someone out there who has a blog dedicated to spreading hate about that thing.

There are nerds on the internet who hate Wil. That means he actually exists. That is all that means.

The topic though is about genetic testing. What psychosomatic diseases are going to be revealed with genetic testing? WiFi poisoning, for example, isn't going to be revealed by genome sequencing. I mean, since it's a bunch of bull-crap.

I suppose that telling someone they're predisposed to depression or some other psychological diseases might increase that incidence though now that I think about it.