...Wow... No.

Your perception of your performance while impaired, and the reality of it, are two different things. Driving tests are not really hard, so being able to pass one in an inebriated state does not mean anything at all. That's like saying if you get home once, drunk off your ass, it's OK to do it again; clearly you have the skills right?

If you drive impaired, eventually you will kill someone. It probably wont be yourself though, it will be the sober guy in the other lane. Sure, people get away with it, sometimes for years; that doesn't make them safe to do so, just lucky.

Join a rescue squad, or fire dept. Run some calls. Learn a few things first hand.

In the 90's, at my high-school, the office was closed after school hours. If one didn't have money for a payphone, there were no phones a student could use. My only option, on more than one occasion, was to call collect. With payphones quickly disappearing, I'm not even sure if that's an option anymore.

I appreciate you're pragmatism. But your personal situation is not universal.

Lego paid for it, sooo.....

You can recount paper all you want. But if the paper has been manipulated you're not really verifying anything at all.

E-voting has been implemented all-wrong. I'm not going to argue that. But if is was done correctly, with audits of the system and audits of the tallies, it would be every bit as, if not more secure than, paper.

Why's that?

We trust people not to replace a truckload of votes before they get to the tallying location. But that doesn't mean they couldn't do it. Or, more nefariously, one could manipulate the tally by legislating which votes are acceptable. Consider the hanging chads fiasco; or, changing the rules of when absentee votes are, and are not, acceptable.

A paper ballot can not be traced back to you as a person. So how is it more secure? What's to stop counterfeit ballots?

You're comparing apples to oranges.

Desk lamps are not trying to be human, even though Pixar has a way of personifying animals and normally inanimate things. People already have a natural inclination to attribute human emotions and qualities to non-human things and animals. We get attached to objects and we believe that our pet fish have personalities, a complete fantasy. However, that has nothing to do with the uncanny valley phenomenon. Your counterpoint, Final Fantasy, worked very hard to give very human qualities to very human looking CGI. The effect was not complete and many people were turned off by it. That is the uncanny valley.

Makeup and bras alter a persons appearance in a manner that is pleasing; most of the time. Makeup can enhance one's color to be warmer, or create a more even skin tone. However, the wrong makeup, too much makeup, improperly applied makeup, can trigger repulsion. Many people find clowns frightening or repulsive. Also, to your point, mimes make some people uneasy. People differ wildly on how much makeup is attractive. A bra can enhance one's shape. The wrong bra, not so much.

I think the bottom line is our brains don't like to be tricked unless we see it coming; and, like almost any human attribute, some people are more sensitive than others. Most people can accept an animation that has human traits but doesn't look all that human (Simpsons, Flintstones, etc.). They are so far from looking human that it doesn't trigger our alarms. Most people can accept a human that acts like a robot, or even a zombie. We see these things for what they are. Humans with decoration, not things trying to look like humans. Most people can not accept something that looks and acts a lot like a human, but not quite. It gets past some of our filters, but sets off alarms in others. We get conflicted subconsciously. We don't like it...

NEC Ion Engines: FAIL
Mitsubishi Rocket Engines: FAIL
So the engine control unit must have been Toyota, yes?

The category provided by the dispatch system determines a target response time. The call taker puts pertinent information into the computer aided dispatch (CAD) system. The CAD will determine priority level, and recommended units. At that point the call is dispatched to the appropriate response crews. An intelligent dispatcher, with the authority to do so, could take a CAD recommendation and alter it before dispatching. For instance, in the situation from the article, the dispatcher would know that a patient who was unconscious with abnormal breathing after a fall is clearly a top priority patient. They would relay that to the responding unit with a high run priority. The ambulance would then run lights and sirens to the scene instead of taking their time as they would for a twisted ankle.

Sold.

You do not float around in your own excrement for 3 months.

Your first deuce comes after birth in most cases. It's called meconium.

If meconium is excreted in utero it can be dangerous as the baby may aspirate the meconium which can lead to serious complications. This is a big reason we suction the airways of babies immediately, before their first breath.

Farnsworth:"...and therefore, by the process of elimination the electron must taste like Grape-ade"

Mediocre minds think alike. Great minds are unique.

Did anyone else find the copper sheet at the bottom of the water odd? Is that necessary to the device's operation? Would you always have to have a static component for something like this to work?

Also, the "boat" didn't seem to have a power source, the electrodes appeared to be attached only to each other.

The article seems rather bereft of information other than comparing the electrodes to a beetle larva. Does anyone understand how this device works? Outside of vague notions of something to do with surface tension that is.

From this article:
"According to prosectors, Petric, 16 at the time of the shooting, was forbidden to buy Halo 3 by his parents, Mark and Susan Petric. The teen snuck out to purchase the game anyway, and was caught by his parents upon his return. The game was locked up in Mark's lockbox, along with a 9mm handgun."

So no, a history of violence wasn't mentioned in the articles I have seen so far. However, it also says he didn't have a copy of the game.

From the same article:
"Lawyers for the accused delivered a brief statement at the opening of the trial, explaining that their client had be under a large amount of stress after being homebound for a year due to a snowboarding accident with nothing to do but watch television and play video games."

So, presumably he hadn't been playing the game elsewhere.

But don't worry...
"Dad, I'm so sorry for what I did to Mom, to you and to the family," Daniel Petric said, according to his father. "I'm so glad you are alive."
"You're my son," Mark Petric responded. "You're my boy."
Dad forgives him...