Let's just hope you don't work for an "executed" corporation. You're just throwing potentially hundreds of thousands of working class people out of a job to punish the top tier - no problem with that, right?

I think I speak for many /.ers when I say... "Oh Jesus". Honestly, if you attempt to justify religion on anything resembling logic you lose. Speaking of "faith" at least gets you out of the logic trap, assuming the person you're speaking to accepts faith as a viable substitute for logic - and of course atheists do not.

There is training that is very good (I personally take it). If your point is that many carry without preparing themselves for the possible scenarios that will likely take place under a shoot/don't shoot scenario, I agree. But if your point is that it's best not to carry at all, I don't.

Outside of staying close to a man, the only real thing a 120lb woman can do to physically protect herself is to carry. I've met some amazingly good women fighters, but even they wouldn't have a chance against 50% of the male population. Men are built to fight. The ability to carry is a womens' rights issue, IMHO.

I'll echo everyone else's sentiments, but thanks for the site and I wish you well in your next endeavor. I've got a bad feeling this place is going to go to total shit now, but such is the way of the universe, right? Good luck - and seriously, this site has done a lot of tech knowledge!

Maybe this particular incarnation of our debt problems weren't entirely real but this "fictitious crisis" is brilliant, and I'm all for it.

Markets don't turn on a company or nation gradually, they do it suddenly and the cost of fixing the crisis is usually far in excess of what is possible. By invoking a crisis Congress has brought attention to an issue that severely needs to be addressed before it's too late. Would you prefer the markets tell us they will not loan us money at any price or would you prefer Congress discuss the issue before the markets force our hand?

Congress deserves credit for very little during this debacle, but invoking a "fictitious crisis" before the markets turn and put us all out of employment is very clever IMHO.

No, parent was implying the point was moot due to the fact that people need to reset their clocks daylight savings. Therefore, the issue wouldn't necessarily be that big a deal. However, this is not the case in places that do not observe daylight savings time, such as Hawaii and most of Arizona.

lolz - love the irony

Not in Hawaii or Arizona :-)

You are assuming human and machine are distinct entities

by 2029 would mean any year up to and including 2028 (this means you and Kurzweil agree - he is being conservative IMO);
in 2029 would mean that year specifically;
after 2029 would mean any year from 2030 (inclusive) or beyond

I am personally interested in this subject so I've done a lot of reading. There is a lot of criticism of Kurzweil, but on the whole, he's been pretty good in my view. If you're looking for a series of predictions and how close he was, check this page out:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predictions_made_by_Ray_Kurzweil

He's been wrong about some (perhaps some would say many) predictions, but in my view I think he's pretty damn good in determining the general trajectory of the accelerating nature of tech. If you consider exactly what the response would have been in 1990 when according to the wiki article he predicted by 2010 "PCs are capable of answering queries by accessing information wirelessly via the Internet." or in the early 2000s "Exoskeletal, robotic leg prostheses allow the paraplegic to walk." his predictions aren't that far off. The progress has been truly amazing and in 1990 would have been nearly unbelievable to most people (esp for something like Watson, I will add)

To be fair, his projection that "Telephone calls are routinely screened by intelligent answering machines that ask questions to determine the call's nature and priority." and "Most books will be read on screens rather than paper." are off... but not as much as the general direction was on, in my opinion.

How much raw computing power needs to be created before it equals a human? We are not that special and the power is literally doubling and doubling and doubling as it has for decades... http://www.conceivablytech.com/8027/products/intel-exascale-computing-arrives-in-2018

+1