These speculations are useful intellectual exercises, but should not be taken very seriously. Intelligent life may or may not last for 10^100 years, but the chances of any detailed theory of the long term future of the universe surviving 100 years is basically nil, and even 10 years is no sure thing.

For myself, I'd bet on a "big rip", except that I don't know how to collect on such a bet.

It's called "self-plagerism," and it most commonly occurs when someone publishes a paper in a journal that claims the copyright. Then, if the author uses their text without approval, it's a copyright violation.

Good riddance.

I remember that when the Patriot Act was first passed thinking that

- this was obviously on someone's wet dream wish list (it was not so much written as released from the vaults) and

- passing huge changes in security laws with little debate and less thought in the near panicked initial response to a terrorist attack is basically a good definition of what not to do in a crisis.

Of course, that was before the Bush Administration invaded Iraq and showed us that purposeful stupidity can be worse than mindless stupidity.

I use Chrome, but only for gmail. That way, I figure that Google just gets to read my gmail (mostly used for public email lists) twice.

I think this Sunday Morning Breakfast Cereal would be perfect.

On Bing, my response to

What happened to the dinosaurs?

(no quotes) is pretty benign - pbs, wikipedia, and national geographic in that order, and then Answers in Genesis.org, followed by slate. Only 2 of the 8 links on the first response page are fundamentalist, the AIG site and a kiddie site. Finally, while I don't agree with Answers in Genesis, they are certainly not a stealth site, and I don't think it is objectionable just by itself that they in the mix.

Of course, "Your results are personalized" so other people may get different responses.

I was glad I had a Mac, but otherwise didn't care much.

Well, you did ask.

The news side is fairly reliable. The editorial page has been brain-dead since the Carter administration, and that was long before Rupert Murdoch bought the paper.

I have talked to Boeing Engineers about this in the past. They say that (both with present systems and new all IP based systems) there is a total physical and logical separation between the three types of networks on a plane (basically, pilot command and control, airplane maintenance networking, and passenger facing networking). They were pretty firm on this separation being inviolable, due to the obvious safety aspects. Either Chris Roberts is blowing smoke, or some pretty smart people made some pretty basic mistakes.

If you think this is only going to be used with warrants you sure haven't been paying attention. Maybe, if we are lucky, in 10 or 15 years the US Supreme Court would set up sensible rules about warrant requirements for fingerprints, but I sure wouldn't bet on it.

I see no reason why these researchers shouldn't be pilloried. Taking state money to improve methods of spying on the citizenry is not a positive act.

They might get fined? That's it?

Can't they be sent to the Eastern Front to fight the Russians?

Where I find a big, big difference is the for profit facilities doing things like plastic surgery. They want to be paid up front, they will tell you what it will cost to the penny, and they never come up with bogus add-on charges.

Kinda hard to do when the bill is from an assistant anesthesiologist for work performed during surgery. That is one of the most common bills to show up months later.

Having used both systems, I would rate the French system as far superior to the American one. I don't regard that as political point, just a statement of fact.