All really good developers are positively not anywhere near the autism spectrum.

The hard part of the job is finding out what other people thinks and wants.

I think egg's are as healthy that anything can be.

Especially with regards to recent research.

Fake eggs may be cheaper though, and probably taste like shit.

Aftermatch: Nothing.

The other informed in leading roles, including other ministers indicated that this was vetted by the ministry of foreign affairs and ultimately the minister.

Coincidentally and very unfortunate, she had been murdered by a madman when the story broke, and I think that took the edge out of any public or criminal investigation.

I think a lot of people hid behind this unfortunate event - she was definitely informed, but since the gentlemen in question where allegedly two very dangerous terrorist suspects, it's hard to tell how the details where presented. The swedish ambassador made some effort to ensure a due legal process in Egypt, but I think in retrospect, everyone can agree that it's was a naïve approach.

I think there is little difference on the vomit-factor.

However, I won't fly in a windowless or driverless airplane. I like the windows because I think I am entitled to some minimal situational awareness.

Besides, I don't think it will happen, since it will make quite a few people too uncomfortable.

Yay!

The risks for the egg-removing is the same more or less, but the chance of a successful implant is decreased while the risks of pregnancy increases with age.

Technically, you freeze zygotes if you have a partner, but that's perhaps what they meant.

No, this is sexism against women.

First - freezing the eggs is simple, but getting them is not. It's not risk-free, and not at all a non-event. If you do not believe me, stab yourself in the balls with knitting needles 20 times after giving yourself a hormone injection every day for a few weeks.

Second. Signalling that healthy women should consider infertility treatment is just absurd. If they work so much now so they don't have time to find someone, is this really the solution to the correct problem?

Helping women (and men) with fertility problems is noble and good (maybe - it's also very hard to adopt children.) But pitched like this, it's just sick.

Is that it? I have needed to reinstall my phones, consistently after a few month although I haven't installed any new apps, etc.
It usually goes to a point where it takes 5-6 seconds for the phone to respond when answering a call - after the last reset,
the performance deteriorated rather soon again. Very annoying.

I don't think the language itself is bad - there is not much bloat left in java8. The bloat is coming from code coventions and jee. And perhaps some retarded APIs - most of the core APIs are rather nice. Maybe low level programming is a bit awkward but doable, and i suppose you need C and assembly for AAA game engines.

There are a lot of architecture astronauts and other complicators using Java, that's for certain.

The JVM is rather fast once it's started, but that takes a while.

Since the industry managed to turn against the users and trust only the media industry, the "trusted computing" solution is not a viable option.

Othervise, it would have been nice to allow only certain binaries or software developers/publishers to run. It would also be nice to sign the binaries
and not allow changes.

Since the user seems to be the least trusted element, and that it seems that I have to blindly trust 200+ root certificate signers when using the web,
there is no use in pretending that there exist any computer security at all. Anyone that is motivated enough will be able to run an executable on your machine.

It's a trillion times easier than driving a car.

The existing train protection systems have a map of the track with speed limits, acceleration and braking gradients, and what not.
Moving the trains automatically is "solved" with a huge amount of engineering, but it's hardly AI. You still need a pair of eyes to monitor everything.

The "fuzzy" problems that probably need some kind of AI includes:
  - Detecting obstacles on the track ( not that important, nothing is supposed to be near the tracks anyway.)
- Operating the doors in a safe manner. (hard)
- Detecting derailment and other fault conditions. (hard) ... and probably a thousand other tasks that is done by a human. Reacting to fault conditions for instance (very hard)

What's the point of that? Isn't it important to get the passengers to board as fast as possible?

I just came of a flight without assigned seats, and the only explanation I could figure out was that it's because the software couldn't handle a multi-leg flight.

Well...what would actually happen years and years before the level of AI that is required for prime directives, is that a slight error in the *very detailed* map used for navigation - in combination with an unexpected external factor, will cause a car to happily run over half a school class without even noticing.

And it will be so far from human reasoning and performance that self driving cars will be banned.

To answer Your rethorical question: No.

More than 90,000 cows are slaughtered every day.

So slightly more than 1 / 1000 of the cattle is tested.

Maybe, but unless a 25 year old with a hat has reinvented that in a browser, it doesn't count.