It's actual happened a lot, it's called 'emergent behavior'. The paper is old, poorly thought out, and written by people who want other people to think that are smart, but aren't actually smart enough to do science, you know: philosophers.

remember kids: philosophers are to science what homeopaths are to medicine.

A computer infected with a work and a virus led to them combining into a new program.

It was better and unique.

Meh. A simple error in the writeup, which I'm sure is not present in the scientific papers.

http://lunarscience.nasa.gov/?question=3318

More like maybe!

"Wearables won't break through until they can work without a phone, partnership chief Glenn Lurie said" -- Yes, I want to replace my old school Casio Data Bank 150 calculator watch ASAP! I do not want to use a mobile phone with the watch. I still want basic features like long battery life, scheduler, phone directory, calculator, alarms, etc.

The screams... it's all about the screams. And dinner. Think of it as the psychotic version of dine-in movie theaters.

And the crappy CBS show it is based on.

"But I bought the game and I should be able to play it to completion with spending an extra penny."
why?

If you are to patient, it's your (social) loss.

Like talking about last month's tv shows.

ridiculous?

I don't know. Wy would you not want to build a huge solar array to power cities? you will still make money. Lots of it, in fact

" In fact, I'd be bound to by corporate law. "
no, you would not be.

Post Carboniferous era, trees are carbon neutral.

" The USA research team, for example, recommends something like a 50% reduction in per capita energy intensity by 2050. That is flat out incompatible with human nature in a healthy economy and society. "
we can, and it's not.
Are you confused on energy intensity?

The energy intensity of GDP (Energy/GDP) can be reduced through energy efficiency and conservation
measures in energy end-use sectors (passenger and goods transportation, residential and commercial
buildings, and industry). We refer to “energy efficiency” measures as the technical improvements of
products and processes; we use the term “energy conservation” to describe a broader set of measures,
including structural and behavioral changes, that lead to lower levels of energy consumed per unit of
GDP. Examples of energy efficiency and conservation measures include: improved vehicle
technologies, smart urban design, and optimized value chains (for passenger and goods
transportation); improved end-use equipment, architectural design, building practices, and construction
materials (in residential and commercial buildings); improved equipment, production processes,
material efficiency, and re-use of waste heat (in industry).

Yes, we can cut it in half by 2050. note, the formula context is CO2 reduction so call all currently uses of petroleum energy in half. it's from 3.1* 'The Drivers of CO2 emissions.'

CO2 emissions = Population x (GDP/Population) x (Energy/GDP) x (CO2/Energy)

*3.11 coming soon for improved networking! *rimshot*

We can build a large enough solar panel array to power every daytime use of our power, every day.
So that alone would eliminate all daylight non clean power.

That's not even getting into industrial thermal, and using dams as storage to make it 24 hour power.

There is no engineering issues with this.
Sure, it would cost 40 billion. so what? hell; 100 billion? long term its a hell of a deal.

There is no reason the federal government can't start building plants. In fact, I think ONLY the government should build, maintain and run nuclear plants. Lets remove the profit motive to delaying proper storage and maintenance.
Smaller, simpler, safer.