You forgot the psychopats who want the power and the best toys. There are already many geeks who spy on other people (usually young women), now they can get paid for it, and will have access to the most powerful machines and the biggest vulnerability database. As ordinary hackers they couldn't even dream of power of that size.

That was my first thought. It's weird that the posters here filled pages with countermeasures like masks, projectors and damaging the system while ignoring the obvious solution. The day my local Tesco starts this shit will be my last day shopping there.

'I had to deal with their legacy code from the Stanford days and it had a lot of problems. They're research coders: more interested in writing code that works than code that's maintainable.

I don't think it's fair to criticize old code by today's standards.

How about letting people take responsibility for their own actions? Marking third-party pages is stupid.

And then he sold that company to the shareholders. His profit is the money he got for the shares.

It's so infectous, it's already reproducing on Slashdot.

They reproduce by eating the brains of their readers.

Get some volunteers, let them play on a machine with an old GPU and a machine with a new one. If they can tell which is which, then apparently our eyes can see the difference. I'd be curious to see the result.

You can already buy keyboard cases.

I definitely wouldn't use it for long periods, but fooling your body's perception heat could have interesting uses. I'd love to see this stuff hooked up to a TV or a computer to give appropriate temperature stimuli during a movie or a game. It would be like smellovision, just actually working.

The advancement is not the cage but that it can rotate freely. That's what allows the robot to continue flying after a collision.

Interesting idea. I guess you are right in that given enough time, most captchas could be "bruteforced" with a high accuracy. But that wouldn't be a practical way of braking them.

The problem with semantic captchas is that if they can be generated and checked by a machine, they can also be solved by one.

Peer review is not fact checking. Duplication is. And without big journals and the publish-or-perish culture they are cultivating, there would be more of that.

I would definitely trust a company that has proven the worth of their technology over a company that has started to develop autonomous cars before everybody else and has been making big claims about it for years yet still refuses to enter any independent test. Until Google shows some proof that their technology actually exist, they aren't going to convince me.