The point of the emitters is not block IR but screw up the camera's exposure. Ever take a picture of someone standing in front of bright light source, and had the subject come out all dark? Its fooled the camera's light meter.

Same kind of deal here, either the IR will wash out the image of the rest of your face, over exposing, or fool the camera into thinking the reflected light is greater than it is, under exposing. Either way the resulting image will be less detailed. There are darkroom/photo editing tricks to overcome this to a degree but it will complicate the process greatly for automated systems.

How the TSA will feel about it remains to be seen.

I say this as someone who is generally sold on TDD being the best approach. At first it seem tedious never being able to write more than an handful of code line before having to stop and write a test, but the ultimate freedom it gives you to fearlessly refactor is worth it.

On the other hand I would never (have learned the lessons of trying) attempt to go back and create tests for a software project like the one you describe; and as a general rule anything substantial which does not have them.

It sounds like you are doing lots of shotgun surgery to nurse some spaghetti code along. One of the things TDD does for you is make you keenly aware of all the cross-cutting, coupling, and cohesion in your code. If you have organized something badly you discover its difficult to author a test for, that's clue something is wrong.

Trying to go back and write tests for code that isn't well organized is FAIL you won't write good tests because you can't and if you don't have good test coverage "passing everything" does not really tell you things are alright. Its painful pointless wheel spin.

Just live with it. Address the compiler warnings, try and diagram us much process flow an interactions across those globals as you can so you have a good picture to look at why you plan groups of changes, do your best and hope the QA test guys catch anything you break prior to release.

I think that is the idea behind the 'electrical pulses' the plan is to depend on neural plasticity, I would guess. The idea is you keep the patient comatose, stimulate nerves all over the body and up and down the spine. This should tetanize various groups of nerves, "cells the fire together wire together" with some luck the brain with figure it out.

Seems suspect to me, but IAMNANS

I know brain injuries for events like near downing occasional leave bodies that can recover to health but the brain so damaged they will never escape a vegetative state. Certainly other brain injuries due to head knocks etc can have similar results.

How many of these bodies are really available? Hollywood would have us believe quite a lot but I am not sure that is the case.

That said how many of these potential donators are really out there ethically speaking? The body deteriorates when we are talking about a persistent vegetative state requiring feeding tubes and ventilators and such. Can we, will we in the foreseeable future be able to better identify when the patients brain won't recover. Right now there is already a financial incentive to pull the plug. What will happen to these patients who can't speak for themselves when those making decisions for them are under pressure to give their body to someone else? Will these lead to prematurely giving up on some folks?

Seems like there should be some lower hanging fruit to go after in terms of modern medicine than head swaps. In fact just focusing reconnecting the sever spinal cord in the same monkey without adding the additional trauma and unknowns associated with the rest of the head swap would probably do more to help the disabled, which I am sure far out number the persistently comatose.

That should not happen as often as it does though. Part of being a "professional" where it comes to software architecture is anticipating reasonable future needs and planning for them.

If a one-line spec change blows the estimates out of the water many times that probably indicates major rework had to happen. It should not be that way most of the time. If it is the development team did a poor job of planing a head, likely, not always if someone changes "suitable for car wash automation" to "suitable for nuclear reactor automation" fine, you can toss the old estimate out the window entirely and none of the fault is your own.

Control and freedom are really synonymous.

The government now has more freedom to define how Internet providers operate. Internet providers now have less freedom to run their business as they saw fit.

The government now has more control of how Internet providers operate. Internet providers now have less control of their business.

Its all semantics really.

Can you people please learn what first, second, and third world mean/meant.

First world - Connected to the United States and the West diplomatically.

Second world - Inside the Soviet sphere of influence, I guess this applies to Russia today.

Third world - Nations not allied with any side in the cold war. This had a connotation of rather backwards less developed. This was not necessarily the case of all Third world places though. It simply meant they were not strategically interesting enough to First or Second world parties to have a close relationship. Often the reason for that was because their economies were small and the natural resources they controlled were few, hence the associate with poverty in common language.

What I meant was if we are made in God's image, than the droid are made in our image, the droid are second generation copy of God's image.

As you continue making imperfect copies from imperfect copies the quality degrades. Therefore if the AI adopts the christian viewpoint of man being made in God's image but also holds it was made in mans image, it will always be less divine than man.

Rather than targeting Windows game studious should just target a wine release. If it works there it will work on Windows version X. If they simply started doing there development to winelib and worked around stuff that is stubbed or does not work on the front end, they probably would get a product that would reliably run on most Linux Distro's and Windows with little added effort.

Wine + the staging patches (RH uses this as their packaged version now) is pretty damn good.

Which is probably a good thing for us. As long as the AI believes itself to be racially inferior N+1 generation copy, it will be easier for us to maintain our overlord status.

Adding to this no matter what you do suffering the loss of her father at such at an immediately per-adolecent age like this is going to be a hurt she will probably always carry. Keep in mind she is old enough to have a pretty good although not complete idea of who you are, you are I am sure important to her if she shows it or not, and she is going to recall both her own pain at your loss and the pain of your wife etc.

That isn't a hurt she might want to work thru in the midst of other big life events. She might be really having fun with her friends on graduation day and not feel like opening that wound, and if she does not sit down and watch the video of day feel guilty at betraying your memory. Other events in her life might simply not take the shape you imagine, suppose you make a video for advice on marriage but she chooses not to or worse feel pressured to marry because she thought you expected it of her?

I think leaving videos behind is a wonderful idea but if it were me rather than making event specific videos I'd make age specific videos, titled like "For Winter Sometime your 25th Year" you can talk about some of things you were going through at that age, ideas about the world you recall having, how you felt about things etc. I am sure she will find your thoughts very interesting. There is still plenty of time to give adive an things as well, like "Spring of you 15th year".

This way she can pick a time when its emotionally convenient to visit with the memory of dad and you can still say what you want to say to here around given stages of her life.

Is it quite that simple? I think a machine should obey its owner to the limits of its capability to do so. For instance your laptop should not let me unlock your desktop session should it? Even if you left it with me meeting room while you went to get some water?

It should however let you unlock it. Maybe if you have so configured it, I should be able to logon as guest and use a web browser but not install software or access your personal files.

The care bot should be the same way. It ought to do what its owners tell it. If I buy a care bot to look after my elderly mother I would want to generally program it to obey her instructions, but maybe I would want to put in a deny list and some event triggers, like if the request includes "chocolate cake" kindly decline and remind her she is diabetic, suggest it could whip up some nice meringues dusted with coco powder if she really wants chocolate.

Wow are already in public office or just practicing before your campaign. I mostly agree with your post but that line is right up there with Clinton's It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is

Seriously man this is regulation of the Internet, it gets to the very core of how the networks is structured, this will over the long term impact all sorts of things like peering agreements. Lets at least be honest about what we are doing here.

Nominally I am opposed to regulation. The trouble is these carriers only exist because of regulation giving them those rights of ways etc. I don't like looking looking at the sagging cable line at the edge of my property but as long as regulation is going to prevent me from sending Comcast a bill or hacking it down, I agree the public and I deserve something in exchange.

Right because FORCING everyone to purchase a product they might not want and at the same time exposing some of their most private information to half the government is anything like applying title II regulations to small number of companies.

Companies that are still free to exit the market anytime they choose, charge essentially whatever they'd like etc. The reality is these regulations bar these companies from engaging in a practice, that outside a few relatively high profile exceptions they don't do much of today, so nobodies sacred cow is being herded to the slaughterhouse either really.

I think your perspective is a little off. One is clearly far more invasive and far reaching than the other. Regardless of which you support and which you oppose it should be abundantly clear why the general public and general congress person would be more likely to have a strong reaction to one than the other.

That isn't really any better. Either the client has to have software the webserver does not control ( and then its not web mail anymore ) or you a couple of minor alterations to the Javascript that runs the thing from the client just posting the private keys back up to the server or anywhere else.

So if the service is compromised by an attacker be with an NSL or some technical means and they can alter the application even slightly you are totally boned.

Either you need to personally be in control of the content, keys, and client or they at least need be in the control of separate entities for you to have any hope whatsoever of a secure solution.