No one said any of it was true. The AC pretended that no one was ever saying miracles happen since the bible was written which somehow makes science better or something. That was false which was the entire point of bringing that up.

It's sort of pointless now that rpstrong showed me the error of my thinking.
http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

You see, all you need to do is set the riffle to it's highest point in the trajectory arc and the laser to the center of the scope. At any distance now, the riffle is no longer being aimed except in a general direction. So once the laser kicks in, the bullet will guide itself to the target. All you have to do is get close and aim the laser right when the trigger is pulled.

I was originally thinking the gun had to be aimed before firing so the laser would have to be in the field of view at the same time. According to this site a .50 cal sighted in a 1000 yards or 915 meters will be roughly 45 inches high at 200 yards and 300 inches low at 1500 yards or 1371 meters. Now most scopes and military sights will have adjustments that can be tuned for the differences in distance. But as you can see, with almost a difference of 350 inches (29 feet or 8.8 meters) between 200 yards and 1500 yards, a laser centered at 1000 yards will have to be adjusted the same or be out of the field of view. So if you had to aim the riffle before shooting, you would also have to adjust both the laser and scope. But because the bullet is guided, you just need to make sure the bullet is high enough in the trajectory arc in order to follow the laser to the target. The laser can be centered at this sighting reference and remain on target.

So basically, I was over thinking it without paying attention to the correct details.

My premise is nothing of the sort. It has nothing to do with individual reality but how reality is presented and accepted. No one said anything about anything being true or not, that is beyond anything I was conveying. The point is that it all boils down to someone claiming to have authority saying something and people either accepting it as true or not. This is because just like those people (who happen to be the vast majority) who cannot do the science for whatever reason, most will never talk to god or be presented with any significant evidence of a God.

Now, you coming out and saying trust me, I can do all this to prove it is still someone saying trust me, trust this that proves it. You say but all these other people say it to, but look at all the churches saying the same things too. People listening will still have no option but to trust you or not just like with religion or science fiction.

Note, I put science fiction out there not because science is fiction but because I wanted to show that people will believe science fiction just the same as real science and/or religion.

This entire religion verses science is a bunch of bullshit anyways. They are tools and used for different things. Less than 99 percent of either will ever conflict with each other and of what will, it has so little of an impact on most people it is insignificant.

"People that do stupid things with dangerous objects often die."

I second this. I don't know if I'll buy one; but, if I do, it'll be because of the health sensor / monitoring functions.

I don't need to see my texts on the device, nor my phone calls. I have a phone already, and pulling that out of my pocket isn't onerous. Heck, if I'm at my computer most of my texts show up there already, since most of them come via iMessage - and in a few months even the SMS ones will be there.

Good news! You can buy watches now - and they come in quite a range of prices and styles!

My guess would be end-cost and interest. Would enough people buy it? My pebble runs about $150. I would NEVER spend that much and certainly not more for something like this.

I received it as a gift -- and love it. I MAY replace it if it breaks or something. I'm unsure. But I really like the notifications on the wrist.

I like how my Pebble tells me I have an incoming call before my phone rings.

Bifocals. I have a pair with clear glass on top and my reading (1.5) at the bottom. Work great for 99% of my day (and pebble watch reading needs). I also have a pair of "birth control glasses" as my wife calls them. Basically, Ben-Franklin type half sized glasses I hang off the tip of my nose and push up to my eyes as I need to work/use the computer. I use those just like bifocals during my "work day".

I felt the same way about watches until recently when I got a pebble. It makes a difference not taking out my phone a few dozen times a day. I also like the fact that it "buzzes" at me when I get more than 30 ft or so away from my phone. It's kept me from forgetting it either in the car or desk more than once.

"If all you want is to know the time, your phone already solves that problem for you "

I haven't owned/used a watch in over a decade for that very reason -- until recently. I got a pebble. And my opinion has completely changed. I LIKE not needing to take my phone out every a few dozen times a day. I like seeing who I calling an sending them to VM or not without taking out my phone.

As far beauty goes, the pebble isn't the fugliest thing around. It actually looks half way decent. And the newer versions are even better.

Do you REALLY need a color screen?

I get over 1 week on a single charge with my pebble. I think THAT makes it a huge difference in any other "smartish" watch out there. Add color would mean more power. Add sound, or more "two-way" functions and again, you require more power.

I completely agree. I have a pebble and just being able to glance at it while on the road to see who is calling or texting/emailing is a huge convenience. Or in a theater where it makes virtually no noise and I can see it without lifting my arm up and the "glow" is next to non-existent but readable.

I STOPED wearing a watch over a decade ago because I had a phone which told me the time. Oh how things have come full circle.

Forget the apps -- it's the alerts that make it useful.

You're right. You're definitely on to something there. And while we're making sure that a professional real estate photographer with his reputation on the line is not to be trusted with a three and a half pound quadcopter, we should be even MORE restrictive of the OTHER dangerous stuff that's moving around our homes and communities. Like, pre-occupied 19 year olds driving cars. Like large dogs on cheap leashes. Like idiots on mountain bikes hopping curbs and cutting through read lights. Definitely start with the Evil Drones, but please don't stop there! There are so many dangers! Oh, definitely don't forget steak knives and riding lawnmowers.

Never mind the tiny number of people shooting a few real estate stills from treetop level. How do you know that the many, many thousands of people who are flying around for fun are being safe? But the FAA (so far) is honoring congress's mandate that hobbyists be left alone, even though they just said that hobbyists flying FPV style are no longer allowed. Regardless, the hobby drone market has hundreds of thousands of customers. There might be a few hundred people shooting real estate. Can you explain why you think it's a good thing to hurt them, but not to care about all sorts of reckless hobby newbies (just search on YouTube)? Please be specific.

How do you know that your neighor, who just had a ready-to-fly quad dropped off by UPS and who's in the air 30 minutes later, is safe? Really. How do you know? And why do you think that people who are doing it professionally, with their businesses and reputations on the line, are more dangerous than a 12 year old kid next door who's on his third quad having crashed the first two in spectacular fashion? How do you know? Please be specific. Because the FAA thinkks the 12 year old kid is fine, but the person who takes great care to avoid endangering their real estate business liability coverage while shooting the occasional photo should be stopped. An odd thing for you to support.

The drugs are often exotic molecules we've cooked up for the purpose; but hormonal birth control exploits the same hormones that would naturally show up, since those are the ones that there are receptors for and that cause the desired changes. The quantity that a dense human population will put out is something quite different; but the chemistry won't be markedly different between humans and other placental mammals.