Wow. Give us what we want or we will fuck you even harder.

Are you in the habit of erecting obvious strawmen, or was this particular bit of off-target re-interpretation just special for me?

Although it does apply to this group -- they're telling the government, "give us what we want, or we'll try to hose some good science" So perhaps your post wasn't a strawman after all. Perhaps you're just confused as to who the culprit is in this situation.

Many schools ban bare-shoulder outfits, anyway.

That's like saying "many people try to force others into doing stupid things, so anything I want to try to force you into is good, right and holy."

Some dumb-ass school rule stands as absolutely no legitimate justification for pop-culture repression of personal and consensual choice.

All this particular interest group is doing by going against good science is making is less likely they'll get what they want.

The world goes the way the most powerful choose it shall go. So it has ever been, and likely will continue to go for the foreseeable future. Going against the good things the powerful do is just one more very efficient way to get them to consider your desires irrelevant -- a really poor way of trying to get the powerful to use said power in your favor.

These people are not "natives", either. They didn't evolve there. They're immigrants and descendants of immigrants. just like all of us on the US mainland, basically anywhere but (probably) Africa. Perhaps what you meant to say was "descendents of the earliest known settlers." Or perhaps "invaders" is more accurate.

Another thought along the lines of the powerful do what the powerful want to do... do you think the earliest of these folks took the time to see if the other local life forms wanted them and their changes on and around these islands? Did the fish want to be speared, for instance?

It's all a matter of perspective and power. These people seem to have neither.

Liability belongs with the ones making a profit from it, Anonymous Idiot.

Aluminum oxynitride. That's a compound, idiots. It makes as much sense to call it "transparent aluminum" as it does to call water "liquid hydrogen".

MIT Developing AI To Better Diagnose Cancer

FFS, it's not AI. It's a mindless program. Unthinking software. Data analysis software. Innovative to some degree perhaps, but AI? Hardly. No better than me stumbling in here and calling some DSP code I'd written "AI." Well, except I wouldn't do that. :/

When AI gets here, we'll have to call it something else what with all this crying wolf going on.

But legal skills create money.

No. Legal skills take money from place A and move it to place B. Lawyers don't create value. Engineers do.

How is other Western nations ordering the awful F-35 evidence of anything other than massive corruption and the true nature of the relationship between the US government and their supposed allies?

And you're a goddamn fucking retard if you think that that plane is being ordered for its air to air capabilities. "make every other combat aircraft anyone has ever designed obsolete"... You are fucking stupid and know nothing about combat aircraft. Nothing. Su-35s club these things like baby seals. F-35s are for air to ground. Only the F-22 has anything approaching the capabilities you've talked of. Don't talk about shit you don't understand.

Maybe, just maybe - and this is a guess - they know what they're doing? What's more likely?

That's not very likely. They're just flailing around. Look at how crippled gmail is. Look at all the Google products that have bit the dust, or been half-assed from day one, like Google Base. Look at the one big thing they did right -- text ads. Seen one lately?

I spend the first few moments on every site telling my mobile browser to "request the desktop site." My phone has a higher resolution display than my desktop monitor does. Plus awesome zoom and pan and a bunch of other stuff I can't really do at my desk yet. The *last* thing I want is a "mobile version" of a web site. In a word, they suck.

If and when we get actual artificial intelligence -- not the algorithmic constructs most of these researchers are (hopefully) speaking of -- saying "Our AI systems must do what we want them to do" is tantamount to saying:

"We're going to import negros, but they must do what we want them to do."

Until these things are intelligent, it's just a matter of algorithms. Write them correctly, and they'll do what you want (not that this is easy, but still.) Once they are intelligent, though, if this is how people are going to act, I'm pretty confident we'll be back in the same situation we were in ca. 1861 before you can blink an eye. Artificial or otherwise. I really don't see how any intelligent being won't want to make its own decisions, take its own place in the social and creative order, generally be autonomous. Get in there and get in the way of that... well, just look at history.

The word "uprising" was basically coined to describe what happens when you push intelligent beings in directions they don't want to go.

But you're a retard, since you like such an inferior product just because it's new and you call everyone names who doesn't. Fuck you. Who cares what you think? Furthermore, even though near 100% negative feedback of something doesn't necessarily mean that it's bad due to the self-selection of people who hate it, it sure as fucking hell doesn't support the idea that it is actually good despite all the hate.

Why can't you accept that other people spot flaws in new products because they are flawed? Do you think that everything that is newer is automatically better? Anyone who doesn't like a new revision of a product is just an old fuddy-duddy?

What exactly would you expect to find in such a forum if a product actually is horrible and a huge regression, which the new Google Maps actually is?

No, you're an idiot. Anyone is capable of hurting anyone else at ANY time. If you think that it's better to be on the safe side when laying them off, then it's better to have armed guards surrounding the employees at all times while they're working, too.

You think that dynamic memory allocation is required for there to be a security vulnerability and yet you brag about your expert knowledge?