It is not even novel. TFA says the purpose is to bypass check-in. Some hotels have been using credit cards for many years now to do this. Eg small hotels after hours. It can even be made more secure by a PIN in your booking confirmation.

  Once you are checked in, nfc makes more sense. Can't they just use any existing nfc chip in your phone or credit cards for ID? Why all the trouble of getting your phone out?

Millions of uranium centrifuge parts sold openly:

http://www.alibaba.com/country...

Somebody call Colin Powell!

Smart guy, but not a great engineer. Unlike Archimedes water screw, his device does not work.
All DaVince did was see an ancient water-screw and suggest using it in the air. He was wrong.
Not that he ever even tested the idea so far as we know.

My 4-year-old can draw a flying robot, but I do not count that as an invention.

Did you work on the Mars Climate Orbiter?

Barely. The wheel only rotates twice a second, and they are keeping the weight close to the hub. The rotational energy will be small, and recovered by regenerative braking or coasting anyway. It really does not matter.
Unsprung mass is not much of an issue on a road bike either. Total mass is what counts, and this wheel _will_ make the bike more difficult to carry, e.g up stairs.

Really? That is faster than the average speed of cars in major cities. (Or minor cities at commuting hours.) And most cyclists would need a _very_ good tail-wind to maintain that speed on the flat on a regular bike.

There are good reasons to limit the speed: (aside from local regulations)
- safety (bike and rider's clothing are not designed for high-speed spills),
- battery life - power is proportional to the cube of velocity
- motor efficiency - designing a motor for higher speed will make it less efficient when it is really needed - hills and headwinds. Remember the motor has only one gear.

You are talking about an electric motorbike or moped, not a power-assisted bike. They do exist.

Thanks, I stand corrected. I see cardiac arrest means the blood flow stops, but hopefully the heart still has some movement.
(The point stands though, 8% survival for cardiac arrest, higher for other heart attacks. )

No, you just misread a badly written article.

The 8% is for cardiac arrest, i.e. the heart stops, without a defibrillator.
Heart attacks generally (myocardial infarction) are not quite so bad.

Branch? Not so much a branch, as the trunk, I would have said.

Don't be offended. Lots of religions start out as jokes or satire, before inexplicably being taken seriously.
If you ever read the Book of Mormon, or Dianetics, you will see what I mean.

It could be time to re-label those E-Meters as midichlorian meters, and make a fortune.

Context please! There is no controversy over the declaration, written by Deists in a predominantly Christian country. Nor would anyone pay much attention to the pledge, if it were not for countless schoolchildren being forced or encouraged to repeat it every day. It is the mindless repetition that is the problem. I understand this is a very big issue in the US, and some states have banned the pledge from schools entirely!

Yes indeed. But you could certainly not say the same for those who modified the pledge in 1954.

The declaration was written by Jefferson, whose religious views deserve their own wikipedia page and are hard to summarise.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T...

While Jefferson uses the word God, it is far from the same sense used by the conservative Christians of 1954.
Politically, they were the antithesis of Jefferson. Interestingly, the original pledge was written by a Christian socialist, but made no mention of religion.
And I really cannot see Jefferson putting God into any pledge.

You may well disagree, but to ridicule the notion is evidence of indoctrination.
Lincoln did many admirable things, but is also chose to pursue a war that makes Vietnam look like a schoolyard fight.
The South was far from innocent, but Lincoln, in the position of strength, could easily have ended hostilities and dictated terms for independence.
He chose to "preserve the union" at any cost, and was ruthless with anyone who opposed the war:

What would you say if Gorbachov had acted similarly with the breakaway republics in the 80s and 90's? A hero for preserving the Soviet Union if it destroyed the infrastructure and decimated their population of the breakaway states?

Anyway, my point is not about Lincoln, but that any criticism of him is still regarded as heresy by mainstream Americans. this is indoctrination.

Hard to take seriously someone who has never heard of Sherlock Holmes. What are you, eight years old?

The God bit was only added in 1954, and probably would have horrified the founding fathers.

Thats the scary bit, which sounds a lot like China. A legacy of the civil war. US is the Hotel California - you can never leave. Last time some states disagreed and tried to leave, millions died.
Fortunately the Russians did not treat their former republics that way!
So long as the Americans treat Lincoln as a hero, instead of a mass killer in the company of Stalin and Mao, we know the indoctrination is strong.

You miss the point: Of course it is all legal. But Sweden could also easily question him in the UK if that was what they really wanted. (Plenty of precedent.)
Their stated motives makes no sense. Of course the whole thing is purely political. You'd have to be incredibly naive to believe the extradition is about sexual allegations from ex-lovers.

Not just Westerners! Chinese is just as hard for Tanzanians or Indonesians. Chinese an awful language, not just the tones but full of homophones and other pitfalls. The only worse language I know is Cantonese. Maybe Khoisan?

In comparison, Swahili or SE Asian languages are a piece of cake, at least at the beginner level.