Who gets to make the tax deduction? And if it's on the dead guy's estate, why per year? I mean, how many times to they expect a person to die in Virginia, anyhow?

Requests to take the survey were distributed via the following social networks and web sites: ...
Reddit ...

I don't think they make grains of salt large enough to compensate for that bias.

Forget both medical and pseudo medical. If you can shield something from a magnetic field, you can create a perpetual motion machine. Two magnets pull towards each other, generating energy, one gets shielded, move them away from each other, repeat.

The possibility of a magnetic shield seems to break some thermodynamic laws, unless I am misunderstanding something.

Each individual feature is just too big. You're looking at individual transistors 20x or more larger than what we have today on silicon. Faster and lower power, maybe, until you try and build a working CPU from them and discover you need a die 3cm x 3cm. Niche products only.

I thought each trade was part of the bitcoin history, so how can you possibly "roll back" trades? I could see sending bitcoin back to where it came from, but both parties would have to agree to everything.

Twitter is in California, and a California court ordered them to reveal information. Twitter is complying with the law.

Try making it more relevant:
Brits using American court system to sue Americans.

Still News at 11 for me.

But that's the point. There aren't any "pure" formulae in the article. It's all pseudocode. Show me the _pure_mathematical_function_ that is patent 120. If someone doesn't understand English, they should still be able to look at a math function and understand it. The article fails that test, and as such I can't call it a math function.

Sorry, but I'm not familiar with "if" in math. What's the symbol for "if"? Or how about "next"? I'm sorry, but I don't see a pure mathematical formula in the article. I see programming code. I was really hoping to see just how something like the 120 patent looked in just math, but alas I don't see it.

Or am I missing something?

I remember an article from.. oh... 25 years ago in Popular Mechanics or similar saying similar things about plasma jet spark plugs. Igniting a larger portion of the mixture farther from the head, etc.

Now it's lasers. Ok.. if the laser is collimated before it leaves the 'plug', wouldn't it ignite the air/fuel mix right at the plug tip just like current spark plugs do? If there's a lens focusing the laser to an ignition point farther from the tip, then is the laser light concentrated enough to burn off any residues? Plus, when a piston is at TDC, there's not a lot of distance to cover to get ignition in the center of the charge, an extended tip spark plug works well in that case, so wouldn't a laser be overkill? Ok, I can see two lasers from one plug in two different directions, but dual plugs are nothing new either.

Color me skeptical about the potential improvements to be had from using lasers instead of spark plugs.

The Audi 5000 had similar issues:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audi_5000#Reported_sudden_unintended_acceleration

Um, did you read up and understand what this is all about? Or am I misunderstanding completely what BT is offering? Seems to me BT is simply offering to cache content on their own network to eliminate a lot of network hops, and reduce latency.

Can someone tell me how an ISP offering to cache media content, for a price, violates net neutrality or somehow manages to create a two-tier internet? Is Netflix _not_ allowed to pay BT to keep a copy of their movies available just for BT customers? Is BT _not_ allowed to cache high usage content that gets repeated hits from their users? I absolutely, positively don't see why anyone is making a big deal of this. Caching servers have been around for ages, and this seems to be just the next logical step. Are caching proxies now verboten?

Micro is rated for more insertions (I believe 10,000) than mini. Plus, micro enables thinner devices.

I see usage scenarios for computers in the kitchen all the time, and each time I cringe at the thought of what the interfaces on those things will look like after typing/touching them with hands full of whatever foodstuffs the cook was working with. Market something like this for an iPad in the kitchen and I'd consider it useful.

Egads, forgot to mention Windows XP. Seems Chrome beta (9.0.597.19) is faster on XP, even on a 4 year old laptop if my results on Chrome are directly comparable to others.

Latest Chrome on a Dell Inspiron 1501 laptop, AMD Turion 1.6 GHz 1 GB RAM, ATI Radeon xPress 1150 using UMA
#1 - 503
#2 - 37
#3 - 6670

Your browser's total score is 9446 out of a possible 50000

IE8 same machine:
#1 - 94
#2 - 1
#3 - 465

Oddly, I cannot seem to copy and paste from IE.

A second run on IE8:
100/1/1215... it seems like minimizing the browser increases performance.
Let's try minimized on Chrome:
541/44/6701 - slight improvement. - Your browser's total score is 9884 out of a possible 50000

Let's try Chrome in a new tab and minimized (other results were in a new window)
548/45/6600 - 9890 out of a possible 50000

So, the benchmark seems to be affected by whether the browser is minimized or not. Might want to check to see if it's also affected by being in the foreground/background with multiple windows open, and also multiple tabs.