(FYI)

There are a few reasons astrophysicists know that it is extremely unlikely that dark matter is baryonic. First of all if all the stars in a galaxy shine on an object it heats up, this heat causes the release of radiation, called thermal radiation, and every (baryonic) object above zero kelvin (or -273.14 deg celcius) emits this radiation. However, dark matter does not emit any radiation at all (hence the name dark!)

If dark matter were baryonic it would also mean that it could become light emitting. If we got a clump of baryonic matter* and put it in space it would gravitationally contract, and would eventually form a star or black hole** - both of which we would be able to see.

So, because of these reasons the dark matter in galaxies and in galaxy groups/clusters cannot be baryonic, and so cannot be planets, dead stars, asteroids, etc. It would definetely not be planets as there is no way 10-100 times the mass of the stars in a galaxy would be planets, as the mechanism for making planets relies on supernovae, and the number of supernovae needed for the that many planets would be far too high to match our observations. I hope that this answered your question!

*provided the clump of baryonic matter was large, and the amount there is in galaxies definitely is!

** we don't observe black holes directly, but can see radiation from their accretion disks.

They formed around stars and then got ejected by meteor impact, star explosion or whatever.

Dark Matter is rogue planets!

(repeat over and over until it becomes paradigm)

Well, for the UK it's normal. They are both in the Coalition of the United, together with the United Arab Emirates.

The Swedes' alliance, otoh, makes no sense. Why would you ally to a country with uglier women? Or, in the case of Sweden, why would you ally to anyone*?

*: well, maybe they could lower the bar a tiny bit to let Ukraine in.

[Disclaimer: This post, combining a bad joke, an off-topic comment and some trolling, should replace all my posts for the day. I have a lot of work and had to optimize my daily Slashdot contribution.]

1 frame?

You've not been in youtube recently right?

I think they prefer their ads to be of the several hundred frames high volume persuasion.

FNORD!

Oh, fjord. Ok, nothing to see here. Move along.

And one day, more bad people start doing illegal things from general population's computers not for stealth, with for incrimination. Interesting times will ensue.

Or, in other words, the judicial system is using the fundamentally flawed argument of "it was your computer". As long as they may work, fundamentally flawed arguments eventually fail. And the more they've been used, the more spectacularly they fail. Because if they fail late enough, their failure brings the excarcelation of innocent people, and those things can kill political careers.

It's a matter of weight, not of composition. Even relatively small asteroids can contain metals priced in the hundreds of billions of dollars.

http://www.asterank.com/

Or pay the salary of the CEO of each of the handful of IT corporations that paid your political campaign!

Tell me, Muse, of that apparatus of many resources, who wandered far and wide, after monitoring the planted fields. Many the men whose crops it saw, whose ways it learned. Many the sorrows it suffered on flight, while trying to bring itself and its data back alive. Yet despite its wishes it failed to save it, because of the corn foolishly projecting twice the cattle of Helios, the Sun, so the god denied them their return. Tell us of these things, beginning where you will, Goddess, Daughter of Zeus.

But, "Mainstream" sites are too ... ... waaaait a second.

"SugarString publishes thoughtful tech-focused stories that track humanity’s climb towards the new next."

Well, they want to be part of that climb towards the new next.

Nobody said the new next was not going to be a shitty place.

Now I wonder what's the official age at which one can start laughing at younger people for the shitty world they're going to inherit.

We need a law against journalists using numbers. It would be less misleading to have them report as:

"[...]a Cray XC40 containing much storage and capable of a large number of flops."

Because you drank too much on David's last Christmas party and you puked on the punch bowl.

The irony is believing that the guy who is more knowledgeable, only asks questions and never accepts any responsibility because "he said during the meeting that there would be problems", is in any way more useful than the guy who gives snappy answers without the knowledge.

At some point a decision has to be made, and raising questions without a plan of what to do for each possible response, is just the non productive self-preservation mechanism of the knowledgeable.