Comment Re:How come smart people usually die young ? (Score 1) 105
Shannon died after a long bout with alzheimers. That brilliant mind had died long before its body.
Shannon died after a long bout with alzheimers. That brilliant mind had died long before its body.
It says, ``
If you are questioning your religion, the Internet, and any other media presenting information on the topic, make a difference.
But it's not like whenever you open a random page there's a pop-up telling you to lose your religion.
Maybe there is another reason for losing religion ie. the breathtaking progress of technology that just happens to be coincident with the growth of the Internet. Why should a person have to believe in a quasi-magical deity when time and again, technology shows us how to make 'magic' happen?
How could you not doubt religion in a world where technology makes us gods?
Intolerance is intolerance. And it will always exist. Mr Eich did not beat up gays, he simply exercised his right to an opinion. He exercised that right within the bounds of the law, as a proper citizen should. He was subsequently bullied out of a job.
Here is how it should be:
... they are simply misidentified and called ghosts, magic, etc. depending on the manifestation. They are also called pseudoscience.
So the challenge is: identify clearly what macroscopic superpositions would/should look like and how can we experimentally create/detect them.
TFA contains links to Wired articles. Couldn't find a link to a NASA catalogue so TFA is a 'heads up' of what is to come, yes?
Here's the link to the DARPA catalogue: http://www.darpa.mil/OpenCatal...
Way back when, while a corrupt Cuban government was allowing US companies to rape the island and it's people, there was a "Cuban Spring". The people were spurred to overthrow a malignant regime and seek freedom. Didn't work out so great because at the time Communism was deemed a viable political model for a free people, but that's life.
So now it's many years later, win hearts instead of continuing the antagonism. Right now the little subversions and embargoes mean innocent people get hurt say: participating in the subversions and getting caught, dying in the ocean in a bid for freedom, or suffering from a lack of goods. Instead, establish diplomatic bridges that will in time yield exactly what you want, another Cuban Spring, only this time without bloodshed because you will have swayed the Cuban leaders not just the masses.
MOD UP PARENT!
Exactly the right question: why frikkin' trees? It's not like there's an overabundance of poplar (or any other tree). If you have to use a challenging material, why not bamboo ?
Lord knows there are tons of those buggers in this god-forsaken neighbourhood !! If only they were useful for something more than wine.
... would mean that we could achieve that state of independence where everyone could 3D print. There would be an abundance of the necessary resource for printing, and the act of printing would be good for the environment. There would be fewer shoe manufaturers but people who were drawn to that field, would become designers or consultants. Not everyone of course. Some would become involved in the new industries that grew up around 3D printing e.g. cobblers might disappear but 3D printer repair people would rise in prominence.
Extrapolate to any other industry 'threatened' by 3D printing.
In which the victim's are cut and hacked until almost dead
Combine this with the seriously chilling 'time dilation' drug and the future just seems a little darker.
The technology of blimps is fraught with challenges not least of which are helium's availability, ground interaction (including launch, landing, and tethering/shelter on ground) and a sensitivity to weather. I've worked with a stream-lined tethered blimp 20' long with a camera and radar payload. In 20 knots of wind, the bugger had to be brought down
Plus, what is the BS about 'clean air'. A common wind turbine, on the ground, is just as efficient
Afterthought: This has to be a military project and the whole Alaska thing is just to give it palatable civilian visibility. You could maybe make a use case for disaster relief or remote military ops
IPCC: doom gloom and the seas will rise by 'x' by 2100
Counter argument: given the complexity of the system and the shallow understanding of many processes, is it not likely that some small perturbation will greatly alter the predicted outcomes of your model
IPCC: then we shall assume that if nothing changes, our outcomes will be proven valid
Counter argument: when in all history has 'nothing changed'? Ergo your models are so brittle as to be utterly unrealistic.
Also when the IPCC starts adding qualifiers that highlight the _accuracy_ of their models, then maybe they will have some credibility. But right now, where are the caveats and cautions clearly stating the assumptions of the models and the sensitivity of the model outcomes to those assumptions? That's right, there are none ever shown to the public.
Bunk.
Maverick's don't get hired.
When they do, it's because their ideas maybe aren't so maverick-ish.
Maverick's work at MacDo's to make ends meet, which means they must do research on their own time and dime.
Stupid suggestion by the scientists. Basically egging others to 'take one for the team'
Say someone was wrongly convicted, are the effects reversible?
All discussion of crime and punishment seems to assume a certain infallibility in the system of conviction. That is an incorrect assumption as has been proven time and again and again and again.
The most chilling part however is that the technology is likely here and now. It's use in the justice system is unlikely in the near-term. HOWEVER, that doesn't prevent it's use in more covert systems of punishment and persuasion.
Now a suspect can undergo torture for what seems like
"The one charm of marriage is that it makes a life of deception a neccessity." - Oscar Wilde
