Are you claiming that there are no vehicular lighting standards in place, or that you can't instantly recognize the position and orientation of a car in the dark based on its lights alone?

Identifying cars based on their lights may be complicated, but it's by far the simplest method of identifying cars by CV at night.

If you can reliably see that an oncoming car is red through a webcam at night, you've already blinded the other driver! Instead of making generalized car-recognition algorithms, why not take advantage of the fact that the other cars will have their lights on, too? The location and color of the various car lights are fairly standardized.

There are some serious advantages to energy-dense, easily handled hydrocarbon fuels, especially when long distance traveling is concerned (range and refuel time).

Until we come up with much better batteries, the Volt style "bring a generator with you" approach is certainly the most versatile. You sacrifice some range by carrying the engine instead of extra batteries, but the electric range is more than enough for most daily commutes.

In your analogy, though, I'd say that hybrids are the CFLs and that EVs are the LED bulbs. Early LED bulbs were pretty shitty, if you recall: outrageously expensive, weirdly colored, and not long-lived.

It's not the check for intoxication that concerns anyone, it's the checkpoints. Around here, the police need suspicion of a crime in order search a person. Nobody has a problem with stopping and testing people who appear to be driving drunk (except the drunk, I suppose).

Wow, I just looked into that some more and it's pretty horrifying. The ruling was more than it being "Just Too Important(TM)", it was that it is too important to the State. That line of reasoning allows for just about any unconstitutional law to be upheld. Even the dissenting decisions were more concerned with the effectiveness of the checkpoints and considered the violation of the Fourth Amendment that they represent an accepted and foregone conclusion.

The majority opinion from Rehnquist: "In sum, the balance of the State's interest in preventing drunken driving, the extent to which this system can reasonably be said to advance that interest, and the degree of intrusion upon individual motorists who are briefly stopped, weighs in favor of the state program. We therefore hold that it is consistent with the Fourth Amendment."

It's a trap.

When Europe gets the blame for ATTEMPTING A LANDING, ALL THE REST OF THESE WORLDS ARE BELONG TO US ! ! !

Either that, or there's a loophole where it's ok for Europe to land on Europa.

You know that this period of the US will read about in history books as such an obvious time of corruption. The occurrence of dynasties is not a good sign of a healthy democratic republic. Save the last two terms, there has been a Bush or a Clinton as President since 1989. Counting VP, they've occupied those two offices since 1981. If you start to count Secretary of State and such, these two families have held top offices continuously for nearly 35 years. And the next race may well be a Bush vs a Clinton, again.

Of the more than 100 million eligible citizens in the US, is the best candidate for President another Bush or Clinton? Really???

That's what I do. The extra hardware is really just a switched battery charger, but you could get better efficiency switching the entire AC output to grid instead of running everything through the battery and inverter.

The panels run the house during the day and charge the batteries for night, but during extended cloudy weather or snow everything will run off the grid without any action on my part.

Well, they have to find out that it actually happened to do that. There appears to be a good deal of "information laundering" going on so that individual agents may not even know that they're facilitating perjury. It's a deliberately constructed end run around our system of justice, which makes it even more nefarious than a few rogue agents.

Have you looked at the root CA list in any of the major browsers/OSs? Why are we required to implicitly trust every single one of these entities to sign anything they want? If those lists illustrate how broken the CA system is, I don't know what will.

DNSSEC doesn't tie you to a registrar any more than registering a domain already did. DNSSEC also solves a good chunk of the MITM that can occur with the normal CA system. DNS is a vital part of the internet. The fact that it is so easily spoofed and altered is the root of many security problems.

The argument against DNSSEC is that there is still a root authority, at IANA, that can be corrupted. Which is solvable with DLV (DNSSEC Look-aside Validation) and alternative trust anchors. Even without that, stating the CA (or specific key) you use in DNS only makes the system stronger. At the very least, that's one more party to corrupt and non-targeted attacks would be broadcast across the internet.

Benzene doesn't hurt its use a fuel, and the total exposure is very very low when used as an antiseptic. The assayed benzene concentration in commercially available 200 proof ethanol is less than or equal to 1 ppm (basically the limit of detection of the test, so 1 ppm at worst). You'd be a fool to drink it all of the time, but drinking a few cL while hiking wouldn't be likely to hurt you, besides tasting like shit.

Let's at least hope that the manager responsible for having him sacked was also, in light of these events, sacked.

Until the first time it goes off while you're cooking.

Anyway, smoke detectors are storage space for dead 9V batteries.

They're easily found next to the charcoal and lighter fluid in every grocery store. How else do you light your 50000BTU_barbecue?