No. Think about it - in space, to "slow something down" means the same thing as "speeding something up," that is, changing an object's velocity (commonly known as acceleration.)

As such, you'd have to spend energy to accelerate toward your target, and when you were about to reach it, decelerate (i.e. accelerate in the opposite direction) in order not to go past it.

Another way to think about it is that in your inertial frame, you are always resting. So there is no kinetic energy to "absorb" to slow down since you aren't actually moving, from your point of view. Of course, that small planetoid in front appears to be moving towards you at a large rate, but good luck "absorbing" the kinetic energy from that impact :)

Bah, 65TB? Wait till they discover what's in /dev/rand! I wish the cryptanalysts good luck!

Like how inflammable is more than... flammable?

That's what the cyborg raptors are for!

I'd surprised to find that they are undetectable by electric or magnetic means. I mean, can you really hide the magnetic or electric signature of a big sub?

Someone has already thought of this - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_anomaly_detector

Which part of "[The mutation's] effects don't occur until after the childbearing years." did you fail to grasp?

Really, just making a textbox that didn't accept spaces or other invalid input (displaying a text message below the box when the user attempts to type an invalid character) would solve all the issues.

I believe this technique is already commonly used in several Windows applications and the OS itself. I can't remember if I've seen the same for OSX.

Firstly, the words 'innocent' and 'guilty' do not belong in a civil suit. The questions the jury had to answer were whether the defendant infringed on the plaintiffs copyrights, and how much the defendant should pay in damages.

After reading the transcripts, I'm of the opinion that she did willfully infringe. However, the point I tried to make was that large corporations (or in this case, a whole group of large corporations) have financial resources that are simply incomparable to the resources accessible by a private individual. This makes for extremely lopsided trials where the better funded lawyer can call expert after expert until the defense is trounced.

Then there is the matter of quality of representation. It seems to me, from the transcripts, that the defense picked an extremely poor strategy (trying to call the evidence into doubt) rather than trying to mitigate the amount damages that the defendant would have to pay. This of course resulted in rather substantial damages when the defended was found to have made and distributed infringing copies.

I was mainly trying to underline the fact that in most of these cases, the defendant is hopelessly outnumbered. Can there really be a fair trial when one side has access to nearly unlimited financial resources, not to mention significant political clout?

FTFA:

Capitol Records, Inc., a Delaware corporation; Sony BMG Music Entertainment, a Delaware general partnership; Arista Records, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company; Interscope Records, a California general partnership; Warner Bros. Records, Inc., a Delaware corporation; and UMG Recordings, Inc., a Delaware corporation,
Plaintiffs,

vs.

Jammie Thomas,
Defendant.

I rest my case.