It's hard for me to see Bill Gates beyond being a spoiled, insecure boy. He talks about all these grand visions (The Road Ahead, et al) yet clearly is out of touch with the real world and the realities of human nature to the point that he dreams up these fanciful dreams of utopia that only get taken seriously because he happens to be insanely rich. It's hard for me to see Bill Gates as machiavellian or otherwise diabolical (not that he doesn't throw a good capitalist tantrum now and again), because he's so clearly scared of being caught for what he isn't -- a man in charge of his own fate. He can't possibly be able to imagine living a life not saddled to his silver, free to be bold like many of the "not haves". If he were to no longer "have", then he'd lose the very thing that defines him -- massive wealth. His ego must be terrified at the idea that he is nothing more than paper and ink.

So he props up these grand visions and philanthropic ventures as a way to give validation to his existence, never manning up to working out his own inner deficiencies. And since he lacks the real world understanding to do so himself, he allies with Warren Buffet types to guide him on what he should do, swallowing completely their belief in the supremacy of the capitalist ethos. But his "plans to improve our world" always come off as childish and unworkable. Indeed, can anyone here enumerate the number of grand plans Bill Gates has put forth that have fulfilled their objectives in improving our world? (that's an honest question, by the way)

As usual on /. there is a great deal of denigration of religion under this post, and that's unfortunate. I suppose under the banner of rational engineering we forfeit any understanding of transcendent experience, keeping our minds locked in facts and missing the beautiful mystery right in front of our faces.

My point is not to defend the abhorrent practices of tyranny by religious leaders, nor the scared multitudes that follow them. But, just like any generalized mass of people, many (if not most) religious people are good people, like you, me and Castillo. The connection to headgear or any other religious garb has to do with orienting one's mind to one's sacred practice -- not because someone told them to, or to show off.

This isn't a question of whether God the sky fairy exists or not. It's a matter of spiritual connection, of keeping oneself grounded in sacred humility and service. It transcends morals and ethics. A Buddhist who does not believe in any sky gods may still wear clothing reflecting his sacred order. If you cannot grasp the power of the sacred, cannot connect to its guidance, then you are bereft of a singularly beautiful life experience.

Looks to me like the comet is a sperm cell impregnating the Sun...then the Sun has an orgasm.

I wonder if the airline industry would try to stop or slow this down. Every ticket sold to get from NY to LA via hyperloop would be a ticket not sold to an airline company.

Given the choice between waiting in long lines to be TSA manhandled, sitting on a runway for who knows how long, then suspended in air for more hours by a machine that could fail in one of any of a million ways and plummet from 30,000 feet for 15 minutes of sheer terror before violent death -- or getting on a sleek new sexy technology ground transport that gets me there sooner and safer, I think I know where I'd be more willing to put my dollars.

Not that flying will go away, of course, but this could eat considerably into airline company profits.

Consciousness is defined as, roughly, conscious personal experience. Nervous system-bearing organisms have it and tables don't...In theory, we could all be as mindless and devoid of consciousness as tables and from an outside observer's POV, nothing would change in our lives, our speech or all of human history.

If you can separate consciousness from the nervous system, as you suggest in theory, then why can't a table have consciousness? Table consciousness would be very different from human consciousness, without the response to sensory input that a nervous system provides, but it could have a sense of 'be'-ing even if that leaves out any awareness of anything else.

More to the point, it seems there's no reason to dismiss the possibility that matter/energy itself is conscious in some way. That, indeed, consciousness is inherent to everything in the Universe, including the singular consciousness of the Universe itself. Why not? How can this be falsified?

As to proof, that's difficult if not impossible with the collective cultural bias against a self-aware Universe. I'm not taking a stand one way or the other, but it seems a glaring omission of scientific research to not approach some of our observations of the quantum and galactic worlds with the reverse assumption that the Universe is in fact conscious. Where would that lead the research? Could research be forked with this assumption in mind?

On a somewhat related tangent, in my experience there is a kind of proof that anyone can tap into that is greater than any proof offered by science, society or religion: direct inner inquiry. While we need to temporarily accept certain things as truth to get by, it seems foolish to fully accept anyone else's point of view as truth unless it is vetted by one's own inner inquiry. Meditation is a great tool for this -- learning to simply observe your own mind, body, breath and emotions. You can be astounded by what you can learn by observing your own consciousness. Matched with the objective evidence of your outer world and more than a small dose of patience, you can go far in life. This is the result of "spiritual or mystical revelation" -- revelation from within yourself, resounding in truth that you prove to yourself through action and results. This is a completely different experience from a belief that is taught from "out there" -- be it religion, TV, God, or Science (to some, those are all the same thing). Those things may teach you truth, but it is only actually truth after it is vetted by your inner guidance.

Seriously, what are they going to do? Break into my house and grab me while I'm in the middle of typ

At least that nice NSA officer was friendly enough to hit the Submit button for you.

For some extremely loose definition of science fiction. Star Wars had fiction but no science. It is sword and sorcery in space.

Irvin Kershner, director of Empire, himself said Star Wars is not science fiction -- it is a fairy tale. It is mythology in the truest sense. Joseph Campbell remarked at length about the mythological qualities of the original trilogy, calling it a modern mythos for our time, and the primary reason for its success. It embodies many of the mythological themes that remind us of the essential adventure of life. We need good, solid human stories told in fantastic settings featuring great heroes to embolden us to bring just a little more of the fantastic into our regular lives, to be the heroes we need to be for our families, friends and communities. The original unmodified trilogy did just that and, IMO, everything since has been trying to ride the coattails of the power of that original mythology.

Judging by the slug in the URL:

http://reason.com/blog/2013/02/04/someone-just-leaked-obamas-rules-for-ass

Whoa! Prez got back!

Some veterans experience symptoms, such as memory loss and anxiety, without noticeable physical signs of brain injury.

I would think most people would suffer memory loss and anxiety (among many other concomitant symptoms) after experiencing round after round of painfully loud explosions, watching their buddies get blown apart and having to kill other human beings, simply due to the unbearably intense psychological strain. Looking at it as purely a physical matter seems to be missing the point a bit. Is physicality causing the mental stress, or is the causation the reverse?

Levels of a certain lipid spike in the brains of mice exposed to mild explosions

I'm picturing mice dressed like Indiana Jones and James Bond running madly from a small toy boat loaded with black cats yelling in high pitched squeaks: "Get down! She's gonna blooowww!!"

Back in 2000 Aaron and I worked together for an organization called Chicago Force (chicagoforce.org), a Star Wars fan club that organized around the prequels to generate income for charities.

I still have a slew of old emails of him and I discussing the design and development of the original web site. He was always very cheerful and easy to work with, and incredibly bright for 13. The world has lost a brilliant young man.

The Monotheist: God is transcendent.
The Buddhist: God is immanent.
The Atheist: God is phenomenological.
The Philosopher: God is cosmological.

Everyone believes in some kind of "God" in some form. The battle is really just over the name.