It sounds like one of those articles scientists put in journals to discredit their peer review process. They make up a bunch of crap that sounds all sciency and then laugh when it gets published.

Somehow people think that if there's one flaw then the whole project should be scrapped. They also think that it should be at an insanely advanced stage before it's ready for use. They want to skip the decades of development that happen from real world experience and go straight to some futuristic magical car-pod.

Except for Quebec. They get their own backward legal system because French.

You're not over-analyzing, you're completely missing the point. It's not his line, it's his momma's. She's the one who says the line in the movie and he attributes it to her every time he repeats it. In her day the chocolates didn't have a little guide. It was hit or miss.

Most likely the two symbols that were shown on the isleaked website were also in a different password of mine and they never really had the proper Gmail password. I have no way of verifying this. However, I can say for certain that I've never used my Gmail password anywhere but Gmail. I have unique passwords for every single account I have on all websites. I use UPM as a password manager on my Android phone with a ridiculously long master password. I doubt it got hacked.

A total surprise to me that my email address was on the list, and they had the current password. I changed that immediately and activated 2-factor authentication. So the next question is how did they get it? It's a unique string of random crap so it had to be intercepted rather than brute forced either with a malicious android app or, more likely, I signed in on a compromized computer. Anyone have any ideas?

The number of streaming viewers doesn't cause these kinds of errors. That's like saying "You exceeded the maximum capacity of your garden hose. That's why blood came out instead of water."

Roundabouts completely fail if there's lots of traffic. If one entrance has lots of traffic entering then it's likely that the entrance after it will be unable to flow into the circle at all. I've seen this in action, or should I say inaction.

Many jobs are lucrative, but so what? Try to do work you enjoy. If you go off trying to learn something just because it's lucrative you'll probably end up in a job where you're maintaining some obsolete system that's held together with duct tape. Not fun. Probably not worth the money for the amount of anguish it'll cost you.

If they're just going to screw it up why have a science advisor at all?

Exactly. Most of the real science they show is wrong. It might be 90% right, but that 10% wrong trumps the bits that are right. It must be agonizing to see them get so close, and then fail. And then people blame the advisor.

The majority of drivers ARE above average. It's a statistical fact.

I made nitrogen triiodide in my chemistry class. Tried it at home but it didn't work. Turned out it just hadn't dried properly, but it was fully dry by 3:00 AM and made one hell of a loud bang. Thankfully I had put it outside.

I made a device in my electronics class in high school that would periodically emit a very high pitch squeal for about five seconds. High frequencies are very difficult to locate so you could hide it almost anywhere in a room and it would drive people nuts.

Fixing a thermopile is very very very easy.