It's a planet without a cause!

I, for one, welcome them.

So this is how it all begins... Although I did get a little chuckle when the first robot attempting the hill climb took a tumble, this is amazing and I can't wait to see this technology applied to the real world. The future really does seem to be an interesting place...

You also have to remember that the human brain also has to handle all of those useless background process like "breathing" and "heartbeats". If you only took into account the user-taskable portion of the brain, then computers have surpassed that level a loooooong time ago.

I think 2 columns of 10 rows would cover most situations (except for maybe the 2003 California recall). If there are more than 20 candidates, maybe have a message stating there are multiple pages that you need to acknowledge before making a choice?

Most of these machines are close to a decade old, so they do use older designs that were new at the time. And it seems so me that making it strikingly clear which option was selected would be common sense, but then again people have been having problems with paper ballots for decades as well.

For the ATM, is it possible that the screen was re-calibrated each time they restocked the cash?

As soon as I read the title, I knew this had something to do with touchscreens. My question is, or something as important as voting in an election, why would anyone trust something as inaccurate as a touchscreen? Wouldn't it make more sense to just list the names with a physical button next to each, similar to what you'd see on many ATM's?

As for many people here saying they never need to re-calibrate their modern phones and tablets, is it possible that they do some type of self-calibration upon startup? I have an old, old Nexus One and on occasion the touchscreen will begin behaving erratically. Simply pressing the power button to lock the screen, then unlocking again resolves the issue.

From what I hear, unless you add a "liked" page to an interest list, it won't show up in the main feed. Unless they pay to promote a post. I just happened to catch this one in that little side stalker feed that shows people's comments and likes as they happen. It's a result of FB's efforts to "clean up" the main news feed by only showing you the stuff you don't care about, but FB thinks you should see.

I vote for Pazuzu.

I can't lie, as soon as I saw the headline "Most detailed image of Uranus..." on my FB feed, I began chuckling to myself. I know, I'm a child.

By your logic, if someone has a public conversation in Chinese, it should be illegal to listen to them since proficiency in the Chinese language is "special knowledge".

If you chose to send your personal information via Wi-Fi, cell phone, or other radio signal, you are sending that information as far as the signal will carry it to whomever is in range. If you were having a loud argument in your apartment, would you expect your neighbors to not listen in? If you send your personal information through someone else's private domain, or through the public domain (whether it is via sound wave, electromagnetic wave, or whatever), you have no reasonable expectation that people within range to receive that information aren't listening to it.

Hardline telephones are completely different as the lines themselves belong to the telecoms. If someone taps a phone line, they are tapping the phone company's private property. If you decide to broadcast to everyone in range, that's your problem.