Dean Kamen, inventor of the Segway, has been working on much more functional prosthetics. He named his bionic arm "Luke", an obvious reference we can all appreciate. Demos of it look pretty amazing. Here's the official page for it: http://www.dekaresearch.com/deka_arm.shtml Also google "Kamen Luke Arm" and you find lots of pix, vids and articles about it.

+1. Way to bring it back around.

Parent post is well stated.

There really is no benefit to becoming adversarial or doing anything to undermine the future success of the project. And there are many possible down sides, including your rep within that company and your broader rep.

Continue to provide them the best value you can. It sounds like right now that value might be to advise them on the level of complexity of their codebase and the level of talent and experience needed to maintain and continue development on it. Even if that doesn't change their minds, you are on record with your attempts to help them steer a better course. And then, whatever their decision, do the best you can to transition knowledge and prepare the new guy for success.

If you leave with them knowing that you did everything you could to help them make good decisions, and you did everything you could to help them be successful given the decisions that they made, they'll be much more likely to call you for the next project. Or maybe the CTO will call you when he finds a challenging project at his next company. If you help people out, even when there is no angle for you, and create a history of doing this, you'll find that people want to work with you and there are more opportunities coming your way.

If you burn these guys, and do it again somewhere else, and create a history of that, you'll eventually find that people don't want to work with you.

Building a good rep and a network of people who recognize your value and enjoy working with you is a long-term investment worth making.

That's really an excellent point that I had not considered. It would certainly be possible to build a curriculum that is completely in compliance with these laws, but that uses the presentation of Intelligent Design as a counterexample to show what science is *not*. You could teach the scientific method and the work that led up to our current understanding of evolution, including the abundant evidence supporting it and the hypotheses that have been shown to be true. Then teach a unit on logical fallacies, manipulation, rhetorical trickery, superstition and cult psychology. Then use what you have learned to examine the scientific merit of Intelligent Design. Fuck, I just convinced myself that we *should* be teaching ID!! And teaching it well, so people understand exactly what it is, what the claims are, what evidence exists (or doesn't) to support those claims, how the message is carefully crafted for specific effect, and how the whole thing relates and compares to actual scientific work. Once we have this curriculum ready, any time some idiotic state passes a law like this schools in that jurisdiction would be able to turn to it to maintain their standards. Make it so!

s/ on / one /

Nope. Electrons and photons still moving at the speed of light, which is relatively constant. (c what I did there?!?)

Ok, mostly I'm just being a smart ass. This may improve throughput and/or latency. But our chips are running into constraints due to the fact that the electrons can only go so far in on clock cycle. The stuff is cool, but it's not going to fix those problems.

Some sources are reporting that the whole way there the robot kept saying "P. Sherman 42 Wallaby Way, Sydney!!"

Also, this is what his wife looks like: https://www.google.com/search?q=Holly+Petraeus&tbm=isch

Maybe. But most of the time they don't prosecute things like this, even though they are technically in violation. This is high profile enough that it might get a different response. My bet, though, is that they let him slip into retirement as quietly as possible.

FWIW, this is what she looks like: https://www.google.com/search?q=Paula+Broadwell&tbm=isch

Yes, some people are trying to do that. That's the point. The way to fight it is to get some solid legal precedents established that clearly state that citizens have the right to record in public, including police doing their duty. Any decision that establishes that right or builds towards it helps. And this one might be a building block that helps the case.

Forget swallowing or stuffing the c4. The new fear is surgical insertion of explosives. Body bombs. Check out these links:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2012/05/13/al-qaeda-s-body-bombs-al-asiri-s-next-threat.html

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/officials-fear-terrorists-body-bombs-us-bound-planes/story?id=16245827

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-18161870

I hope someone will soon put to the legal test the assertion that what this allows police to do without a warrant can be done by any citizen, including by any citizen towards the police. This may help to support the rights of citizens to record police officers while they are on duty. Hey, if any property that doesn't have a building on it is fair game for surveillance, by anyone, it opens up opportunity for all of the citizenry. Not saying I like this, but maybe there is a positive side to it.