You mean aside from the giant "Onion-SPAN" logo at the bottom right corner throughout the entire video?

Most of the physical "chess trainers" you could buy 10-15 years ago would move the computer's pieces automatically. I think the point of this article is that there is a DIY system presented that can be easily connected to the existing gaming infrastructure. Sure, you could design a piece of hardware that moves the opponents pieces and links up to the public servers, with wifi, but that would not be an inexpensive DIY project anymore.

Designed experiments *attempt* to establish causation. They don't necessarily do so, as they can (and often do) establish instead a causal link via a secondary system.

In this case, for example, the actual research article states that the researchers believe the magnetic fields disrupt the ability for the subject to properly evaluate the intentions of the story protagonist, thus altering the outcome of their moral evaluation. This is different from fundamentally changing the subject's underlying moral framework.

Thus, the current study does show a causal link, but only between magnetism and perception, not a causal link between magnetism and morality.

By the current logic, if I throw a brick at your face and you stopped walking, I could then argue that bricks thrown at faces cause legs to cease functioning...


....prepares to be buried for daring to argue with the reductionists...

In the last decade or so, research has finally shown that new synapse formation and pruning continue to occur throughout life, not simply during the critical period in our early years. (the main article here is one such example). So, while the statement about re-learning a bicycle is likely correct, to say that most of our neural networks are fixed and operate only on changing synapse thresholds is questionable.

The only person to ever mention "true" north is the Slashdot poster. TFA never describes true north, and actually specifically states that they are using magnetic north. I am not entirely sure *why* they went out of their way to add the "true" and make the description *untrue*, but thought it worth giving credit to the actual science writer for understanding the difference...

From the same english rule that allows for words like Phoenix (unless you pronounce this Fow-nix). Words where oe is pronounced as "ee" are from the "ioticized omicron" spelling in Greek, ÎÎ, which was originally pronounced like "oy", but is often simplified into just an "ee" sound or similar.

Some of the better articles on this topic have discussed it's relevance to other smartphone users as well. Seems as relevant as any of a number of Slashdot articles on security holes in computers/phones/etc.... iPhone problems get so much attention because the device is so prolific, and because Slashdot users all either love the iPhone or hate the iPhone... Or think it's just okay...

This is the key point -- it is fairly standard for a company to own a variety of brands in order to make the customer feel more comfortable, or offer a slightly different version of their core service.