Meh.

If you want a flaming hellscape, Kilauea is a little candle compared to Bárðarbunga in Iceland. Kilauea erupts a couple cubic meters per second. Bárðarbunga erupts a couple hundred. Kilauea's gas emissions barely show up on satellite images. Bárðarbunga's just last night caused levels so high in a town a hundred kilometers away that it went off the top of the safety scale (which they got from Hawaii ;) ). Bárðarbunga has already erupted more lava than of Mauna Loa's multi-year eruptions in modern history, in under two months, and is up to about 1/6th the volume emitted by Kilauea in the entire 31 years of its eruption, with no signs of stopping. And it's doing all of this through a dike dozens of kilometers long. The magma chamber itself may still actually go off, mind you. An area the size of Manhattan is currently dropping by about a foot per day into the caldera, and has been doing so for months, causing one in every five powerful earthquakes on Earth. The caldera has released the largest lava eruptions on Earth since the last Ice Age, as well as floods several times larger than all of Earth's major rivers combined.

But nobody cares about Icelandic volcanoes unless they take out European air travel ;)

What percent of the US's population do you think is in the risk of a major natural disaster of some kind - volcano, flood, hurricane, tornado, earthquake, landslide, avalanche, etc? This time the dice got rolled and it was their homes that came up snake eyes. It should be noted that the town was built before Pu'u 'O'o became a "thing". There were no signs back then that Pu'u 'O'o was even likely to become an active vent, let alone one that would erupt for over three decades.

Now who's laughing?

Among them, things that don't accidentally go wrong but which someone can make go wrong

What exactly are you talking about - in good real-world systems - that is more silently corruptible than paper elections? E-voting even offers ways for users to confirm their vote on file with the electoral commission (without being able to prove their vote to others), something that regular paper voting does not.

The current administration isn't trying to bring democracy to Iraq. They're trying to.........actually I have no idea what they're trying to do.

It's okay, neither do they ;)

Really though, while this is said to be due to terrorism, oppression, genocide, and the like, we really know the reason: it's that IS's ideology involves extensie use of MS Paint and an arabic version of Comic Sans. One simply cannot allow that to flourish.

If you're looking at such tiny statistical differences that barely even surpass statistical noise, which is what the vast majority of these suppossed "psyhological gender differences" are (far, far more variation within groups than between groups), crediting them to some sort of innate difference is an extreme stretch, when a far easier explanation is simply culture and upbringing.

The study you linked "doesn't mention all female groups", your words. I'm saying that that claim needs a cite or needs to be dropped. And I can't read what your link itself says because I get a 403 error. But your very description of it states that it doesn't address the claim made that "all male groups work well" but "all female groups were unstable long term". Which is just gross stereotyping presented as if it's some sort of scientific fact.

Surely it had absolutely nothing to the fact that by and large women were actively discouraged if not banned from higher education throughout most of modern history, with as a general rule up until the 20th century only aristocratic women being able to take up the sciences (as a hobby - but even that was actively discouraged, supposedly "bad for their health"), and the few women that managed to publish scientific findings generally had to do so under a male name. No, clearly that had no influence whatsoever!. Clearly science is all about aggressiveness! Which is why the world's greatest scientific discoveries have been made by wolverines.

Right. So the US didn't care enough to Assange to even watch him and inform the Swedes when he left the country, nor to inform the UK police (or simply stop him) when he jumped bail and fled to the Ecuadorian embassy... but despite not even taking the time to watch him they're instead planning an outright abduction and to "disappear" him outside of the courts system? When even Manning, the source of the leaks, the person who actually broke her military oaths and wasn't even arguably a journalist, will only be serving 7 years? Yeaaaaaah, got it.

Sorry, but the world does not revolve around Assange as much as he likes to pretend it does. Assange was living in a paranoid fantasyland pretending to be a spy in the middle of diplomatic intrigue long before he became famous through Wikileaks. Given that his family spent years running and hiding from a cult as he was growing up, there is context to his behavior.

Yes, there is a Wikileaks investigation - one which has been declared all but impossible to charge Assange in. There are no charges. The GP is correct.

Even Mr. Conspiracy Theory, Assange himself, doesn't believe the "Stratfor endictment". Stratfor for the most part is just people BSing about what they read from things that are in the public record. The most hilarious example was when Wikileaks retweeted from one of their Stratfor docs, "New #Stratfor docs: US soldier stealing $22M from Iraq?" What was this amazing Stratfor doc? It was a Stratfor guy commenting on an email that he received:

Dear Friend,

My name is Sgt.Walter Evans, an American soldier; with Swiss Background, serving in the military of the 3rd Infantry Division in Iraq with a very desperate need for Assistance. I and my partners moved one of the boxes containing funds which we believe is belonging to Saddam Hussein in March 2003, the total fund in this box is (TWENTY-TWO MILLION UNITED STATE DOLLARS), this fund had been moved via a safe Diplomatic Courier Service to a secured security company...

Basically since we are working for the American government we cannot keep these funds, we are Three (3) persons in involved. This means that you will take 25% percent and 75% will be for me / my partners.

Yes, that's a typical Nigerian-style spam email. Which Wikileaks retweeted as being a Stratfor-sourced scandal.

So, on the one hand, it's sort of a spammy/advertisey thing to begin with.

On the other hand, I'm also not entirely convinced that the code coverage tool really solves the problem, because a given line of code can have different effects under different circumstances.

If you read in an address from a text stream, and then write to the memory location denoted, that's just one line of code executing that dereferences the pointer, but good luck determining what it does on all future invocations based on watching it execute once. Similarly, consider a straightforward loop like "for (i = 1; i len; ++i) a[i] = 0;" where every line will be hit if len is at least 1, but the effect of executing the code is, to put it mildly, somewhat variable.

While "only 5% of my disk" is now many times larger than it used to be, so are the things I'm moving around, so "95% full" is just as bad now as it used to be.

Basically, once we got past quotas measured in single or double-digit numbers of kilobytes, this stopped changing for me. 95% full on a 100MB disk and 95% full on a 500GB disk work the same for me.

The Daily Mail, really?

Hmm, now I'm curious. A fighter may have a takeoff weight of say 15000kg. Let's say that the "short lean female" saves 40kg over an "average male". With the other reductions - clothing, oxygen, etc - you probably get down to maybe a 60kg savings. That's a 0,4% reduction in system mass. The rocket equation (applicable here too) probably boosts that up to about a 0,5% benefit in many regards. Still not that much

However, if you can shrink the cockpit , then you're looking at a much bigger advantage - possibly 100-200kg extra weight savings and maybe cutting 5-10% off the total aero drag. That could actually be a big deal - relevantly faster accelerations, top speed, range, etc.

Good. Space suit design needs a modernization anyway.

There is no "how human societies have been organized". Some societies have had (and even continue to have) near complete segregation of the sexes except for reproductive purposes. Some have had full integration.

And "popular wisdom" is in general stereotype BS. It was "popular wisdom" that said that people of African descent were worthless for anything except manual labor and it's pointless to try to educate a woman, that gays are a social evil that needs to be obliterated, that burning witches is the only way to save the town, and that letting the races mix is tantamount to national suicide.