It just isn't the same with a 15 second ad tacked on the front.

Very interesting; is there a technical book (or chapter) or paper with a good overview of this comparative aspect of fly neurons?

I was just starting to look around to see what's available on comparative neuroscience in general, based on an interest in the most salient functional differences from human neurons, so anything related to that more general topic would also be welcome.

You might want to look at some house after the police have searched it, if you don't think they are still extremely disruptive. They are generally worse if they don't find what they hoped to find. Wantonly destructive is not always an overstatement.

You have a lot more faith in the integrity of the government than I do.

The trouble is, this isn't the usual slippery slope. This started out as a reasonable legal procedure back when hard disks were small. The slippery slope was the storing more and more of personal history in digital forms. Originally allowing all digital media to searched was reasonable. Now it's quite a bit less so. Next year it will be worse.

(What was unreasonable before is that they would seize the hardware and keep it to punish the accused, often never getting around to actually filing a case.. The punishment was the loss of business records, etc. It was still abuse, but a different abuse.)

That's a pretty big place to be called "particularly described".

OTOH, it looks as if they are only allowed to look for evidence of one particular kind of crime. That narrows it a bit, if the restriction can be believed. Unfortunately, a lot of instances of "independent construction" have come to light, which shed a lot of doubt on how well this kind of restriction is enforced. (True, this case doesn't involve the spooks, but the same processes can be used.)

Sort of. But they should be required to narrowly specify the information that they are looking for, and have evidence that would lead a reasonable person to conclude it is probably there. And they shouldn't be allowed to record anything that doesn't match the items described in the warrant.

And I quote: "If you give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest of men, I will find something in them which will hang him." -- Cardinal Richelieu

The problem is that one agent of it under reckless evil can undo the work of 100 agents working selflessly for good. And that's assuming the "good" agents don't collude to protect the bad apple.

OTOH, this judge thought it quite reasonable to search an entier hard drive. And said it was established predecent. Yuck! That's NOT a narrow search.

FWIW, my *GUESS* is that this wasn't planned. Somebody the other day said that this kind of rocket launcher can be set to automaticaly fire on anything passing overhead. That sounds to me quite plausible. So my guess is that somebody set it up on automatic, and took a break when they shouldn't have, or that they were assigned to do something else, so the left the launcher on automatic, or that it was lunch time, so..... etc.

As to WHO the negligent party was, it's plausibly the separtists, it's plausibly some Russian advisor who was detached to help them, it's plausibly anyone who had one of these launchers. It's the kind of stupid thing people do when they're confused and harried. It probably wasn't the Russian troops. This isn't the kind of thing people do when they're part of a standing chain of command.

The point was "without warning". Drunks generally give plenty of warning that they are getting violent. This guy was just walking down the street.

OTOH, I'm relying on third-hand information about why. Apparently he had a reputation for taking "angle dust" and then becoming violent some time later without warning. Prehaps it was an idiosyncratic reaction, sort of like the "cat" or "dot" reactions to morphine. But I was told that it's the kind of thing one needs to expect from PCP users. Is this true? I sure don't know. But the "without warning" is ... rather hard to deal with.

OTOH, I guess that if it were easily available, those who liked it would kill themselves off fairly quickly. Presuming that the information that I got was correct.

Of course, the old Orion design has been significantly surpassed by a number of newer designs. Medusa, for example, is much better than Orion - the bombs explode in front of the craft behind a gigantic "parachute", which captures far more of the energy and the long cords on the parachute allow for a much longer, smoother acceleration pulse. The bombs are also able to be detonated much further from the craft, and the craft may be made a lot smaller.

Nuclear thermal - the first version that was being developed called Nerva - allows for "clean" (to varying degrees) fission propulsion from the surface. Or if what you want is high ISP in space, then a fission fragment rocket goes much higher than an Orion or Medusa design (and scales down a lot better)

California has lots of oil too.

It remains locked up by the Environmentalists and Bureaucrats. So you have oil, but no oil industry to speak of.

It makes perfect (business) sense to locate it in a state with reasonable wages not drive up by unreasonable taxes and regulations, huge amounts of available land, common sense zoning restrictions, reasonable environmental regulations, and politicians that are actually interested in your business becoming a success . It's what's made the oil/gas/information services/computer/auto/semiconductor/etc. industry successful so far.

I don't experiment with drugs myself because I am leery of addiction. Getting off tobacco was a difficult process the second time, whereas the first time I just stopped without problem. I don't think I want to experiment with anything else that's addictive.