The whole notion of IQ has been discussed ad nauseam here on the boards. We all know it's bullshit, so there's really no point in discussing it further.

Your phone doesn't record and retain your voice calls, if it did, you bet your sweet ass they'd be going after a more lengthy history of voice communiques.

It's default that most phones save messages, and because it's convenient for a large majority of users. Due to this, phones record innumerable amounts of texts; smartphones especially.

Change how the phone works, and you change the expectation of content delivery, archival, and investigation.

Personally, I'd rather just see the technology improve so that the image is more accurate, which seems likely.

The 2 picosecond resolution is obviously the limitation here; just like that of a camera with a 240p resolution, or a low Frames Per Second. The faster a camera like this is able to collect reflected data, the better the overall quality.

Just think of the implications for photography and cinematography! Michael Bay would have a field day with this shit. And then someone with talent could actually make a good movie, too, but you know, whatever...

The future looks rather interesting, albeit vague, with this tech. And it's just around the corner.

/pun

Couldn't agree more.

Unfortunately, this comment will likely be buried, but I would LOVE to be a part of this.

I'm currently homeless (in LA) and I'm always trying to find decent hotspots that are free, or at the very least require very little monetary investment. If I were walking around as a mobile hotspot, I would never have to worry about it. To top it off, I could get paid by others to do the very same thing!

I understand that there is some concern as to whether or not this is some form of slavery or taking advantage of those who are in a not-so-ideal situation. To me, it sounds like an innovative capitalistic idea. Nothing wrong with that, right? There are a lot of homeless people in this country, why not incorporate their mobility (yet relative stationary position) with something desired by those with a bit more capital?

I've witnessed and conversed with a smorgasbord of varied homeless persons, and many are simply just not in a good position; be it the consequences of an ill-conceived action, or a matter of circumstance. Yes, there are those who prefer to be homeless (to a degree, I fit that category, there's quite a bit of freedom in it, and I'm doing something of an experiment on myself...going well so far, considering), some whose brains are fried due to excessive drug use, or are mentally unfit for integration into current society...those may or may not be fit for this program, but it evaluated on a case-by-case basis.

I see that the best way to determine who is most likely to create a synergistic profit margin is via interview. Most people I've talked to who are not homeless are flabbergasted at the fact that I'm without abode, and are generally surprised at my ability to articulate my words. Yet, here I am. I have no intention of imbibing drugs or excessive amounts of alcohol (social drinker), so I feel that I would be a perfect candidate for this program. I'm certain there are plenty of others out there who would not abuse the extra finances garnered from this program.

I can actually see a future in such a methodology. However, instead of utilizing only the homeless, use anyone willing to take on the task. Just like those advertisements that people wrap on their car, I'm sure people would take advantage of getting paid to provide internet to nearby patrons.

/soapbox

What about persons previously convicted? I doubt they're gonna retroactively "fix" those kids' lives.
It's still pretty fucking stupid to charge them in the first place.
At least it's a step in the right direction, albeit a small one...

Because trolls trolling trolls.

Like you, I had hoped for more. Despite the summary and any visual proof, I still find the whole "bouncing off the architecture" less than exhilarating. Walking past it, I would likely have a double take and watch for maybe a few minutes.

What I had in mind was something like a crossover over of 2 different games:

* Ricochet - Breakout style game play with a better aesthetic
* Curve Ball - 3D-styled Pong.

Those two ideas combined with the idea of destroying a building would be kind of cool. Now exactly sure how it would play out, but I'll leave that to the Engineers.

Nerdgasm

...all of Verizon's current smartphone plans have data caps

If you've got an Unlimited Data plan (as I have), this won't be an issue. The throttling of your service will be, however.

Fuckers.

The unfortunate facts are that self defense is only warranted when fleeing is unlikely. If your son retaliated when he had the ability to retreat, the self defense plea doesn't hold ground. This even goes for serious acts of violence.

You're absolutely right, the policies here suck donkey balls. It's so very much black and white, with little consideration for the middle ground, trying to understand the circumstances on a case by case basis; like the sex offender laws.

IANAL, but my suggestion, as someone who's dealt with the Texas criminal "Just Us" system, make all efforts to clear your son's criminal record as soon as possible. Otherwise, his adult life is going to be rife with obstacles and irritants.

Side note: Seriously? A fine for profane language? What the fuck?

No, they just use Keyloggers.

Android user here: I can to go Settings > Location & Security and turn off "Use Wireless Networks" and "Use GPS Satellites" location settings.
Any time I use an app that requires location information, it cannot find me.
Additionally, with those settings turned off, when I take a picture and look up the EXIF Data, the GPS information is blank.

It may or may not be as secure as I think it is, but that's pretty efficient in my book.

The video posted in the summary is quite suitable for the most part. There's not a loose eyeball, drop of blood, splintered bone, or bit of brain matter to be seen anywhere.
The video sucks doubly for that reason...

It makes no sense to me that something like polygamy is an arrestable offense. Aside from the mediocre tax breaks you get from marriage, what are the benefits that you can glean from multiple marriages that would cause it to be inherently illegal?

Someone please mod parent up. I already knew the aforementioned details, but dammit, that was a clear and concise explanation.