No. It's *YOUR* CFLs that are complete junk. I bought a bunch (Philips Marathon, 900 lumen, 15 Watt) about five or six years ago and have yet to have one fail. I don't have any of that "build up to full brightness" nonsense I've seen in other bulbs. It's full brightness right away.

So, given the experience that I and a significant number of CFL purchasers have had, is it any wonder that we scratch our heads at your bad luck and wonder about your power quality.

The big box stores are full of 3D televisions. Depth perception is not an issue.

That's an interesting insight. I suppose the logic is that you don't want to plug it into the wall to prove it's a working device, because OMG that might utilize the higher current to set off a bomb. (I see no reason why internal batteries couldn't do the same job, with a lot more control at that, but, TSA logic.)

I wonder how they'd respond to my laptop, which is old enough that the battery is entirely dead, and it's not worth spending $150 to replace a battery in a laptop now worth about $50. It works fine when plugged into the wall, and not at all otherwise. (When I do drag it around, I also take an extension cord.)

Thanks to the plea bargain system, the conviction rate already hovers in the 96% range, at least for the jurisdictions I know about (Los Angeles County for one).

That's an excellent idea! What happens to people who snoop above their clearance, hmmmm?

[Please, ghod, don't just give them a higher security clearance.]

Dogs tend to home in on galvanic reactions and electronics even without training; I natter on about this somewhat above. This is why folks often learn to not leave their keyfob lying on the coffee table.

Now I'm wondering about that in light of the freedom of association. Isn't the gov't compelling membership in a prescribed gun club as a condition of exercising your 2nd Amendment rights?

Remembering that in the era cited, a "woman" was "a girl who had reached menarche", ie. around age 13.

[I don't recall if Jewish law has anything to say about age]

And it would only take once for a bright dog to connect "scent of activated charcoal" with "target". They DO make that sort of association.

As to the various things hunters attempt to disguise their scent, I'm too lazy to look for it right now but I recall seeing a study on the effectiveness of scent-disguising potions and amulets, and the conclusion was that they accomplish about the same as any magical potion or amulet.

See also above where I talk about distinguishing one scent from many, as dogs do all the time anyway.

The fallacy is that the smell of dirty diapers will overwhelm and disguise the scent of the target. The truth is that dogs with good noses (which not all have) are quite capable of sorting out different scents from a multitude (in fact they do this every time they follow ANY scent, since almost everything in the world HAS a scent), and merely covering up the target scent is usually insufficient. Also, they can detect a mere handful of molecules, what any object might naturally ablate. Furthermore, experienced dogs learn that if you lose one scent, you follow an associated scent, in this case the foot track or bodyscent track of the person who hid the bagged target.

I used to live where some prior resident had thrown beer cans around the front yard, but across the years two feet of dirt had blown in over 'em (very fine dirt, very densely packed). I was mystified by the deep narrow holes my dogs were digging, til I realised the goal was an aluminum can, two feet down, which the dogs evidently scented and targeted. (Dogs tend to home in on galvanic reactions and electronics in general, even without training. This is why keyfobs are a fave chewtarget.)

[Pro dog trainer here]

And even if dogs could make explicit statements, dogs are like children in that they want to please -- and that includes telling you what you want to hear. If there's more reward for telling you "drugs and disks in that box" than for finding nothing, you betcha the dog will alert, every single time. Dogs can and do "lie".

[I am a pro dog trainer. That detection dogs commonly produce bogus results a la "Clever Hans" is pretty obvious to me... but evidently not to the people training detection dogs. But it does explain why perhaps the most sought-after detection training prospect is the retriever fieldtrial washout, who has already been extensively taught to take direction.]

Speaking as a professional dog trainer, this does not surprise me in the least. Nearly all "go achieve that goal for me" training is basically cue-taking, whether the object is to find drugs or to find a shot bird in the field. Drug detection is fundamentally the same as a very short range blind retrieve (a retrieve where the dog is directed to an unseen bird). If I "lie" to the dog and send him for a bird that doesn't exist, he'll still go hunt for it, and so long as he's at least occasionally rewarded for the hunt, he'll continue to perform it. Dogs are optimists.

Let me bring up the subject of the entire story: "Airbus Patents Windowless Cockpit That Would Increase Pilots' Field of View". So what is the point in bringing up a plane as an example of a windowless cockpit when it clearly has cockpit windows?

If I am hit by your acquaintance while they are giving you that free lift, their private insurance will cover my medical bills for as long as needed.

If I am hit by a taxi from a regulated company, their business insurance will cover my medical needs for as long as needed. The fact that they have adequate insurance is something that is checked by the taxi licensing people.

If I am hit by an Uber driver, well who knows how much insurance they have - Uber covers them for $1Million but that doesn't necessarily cover even a year in medical expenses or long term care, so I am left recouping the cost of my care from the Uber driver themselves. Uber drivers are not regulated or inspected (yet - wait for that shitstorm to hit Slashdot when it happens) so there is no guarantee that when you get into that Uber car you are actually insured at all.

All of those would take out a camera as well, with a window having the benefit that one can simply shift one's head and see out beside the birdsplat/ice/debris/whatever. Straight-Outta-Luck with the laser, with both systems though.