I'd suggest getting your kids to learn:

1) Organic Chemistry (think Mad Men) - drugs will never go out of style.
2) Weed farming (ibid)
3) Mushroom cultivation (ibid)
4) Bulk chemical engineering (ibid)
5) Psychology and counseling techniques.

It's just a matter of being ahead of the curve.

Don't worry, they've thought about that. Most modern high performance weapons need maintenance and spare parts. Get on our shit list, no maintenance and no spare parts. It's either us or the Israelis (who somehow manage to manufacture high performance US weapon systems in their entirety).

Ask the Iranians. Their 'modern' Air Force has lots and lots of hanger queens. They've gone to making model RC planes since that is the best they can do on their own.

Kaboom. It's the earth shattering kaboom.

Bursting in flames is so 19th Century.

Really. This. How hard is it NOT to flame people on a COMPANY EMAIL system? Even if some hacker doesn't get to you, your boss or some HR flunky might. Leave the immature conversations to places like Slashdot. It's what we do ....

Every. Fucking. Hospital. Everywhere.

The only thing that keeps this from being a problem is that the gory details of most people's lives are really not interesting to anybody and they are hard to monetize. I would imagine that hospitals and clinics around Hollywood have been hit multiple times. If you are a 'high value target', ie, nobody here on Slashdot, I'd be worried.

Very worried.

Ah, the intuitive AC. One course in physics and he is light years beyond rabble of academic researchers who have spent their entire careers on these intellectual dead ends.

A Nobel for you, sir! A hear there is one floating around, waiting for the highest bidder.

Kinda depends on how you look at Lamarkian inheritance. While not the major driver in evolution, epigenetic changes (through, for example, DNA methylation) can do exactly what Lamark hypothesized.

True, this isn't particularly earth shattering, but you are incorrect in stating that there is no change in DNA. Methylation covalently (stably) alters DNA. So it actually does create a different nucleotide, one that is recognized by the cell as different from the original. This COULD result in germ cell (ie, heritable) changes.

There is absolutely no data to suggest that this particular set of methylation events has anything to do with reproduction or reproductive fitness, but mechanistically, it's possible. We are still pretty much working out the importance and scope of DNA methylation. In this particular instance, it is not at all clear that it does anything except alter gene expression - and we know that exercise causes gene expression changes. Those new biceps didn't just magically pop into being (unless you are photoshopped).

Not quite. Sperm (in humans) are stored in the epididymus.

This post brought to you by the National Association of Biological Pedants.

Yes. That is the interesting bit about DNA methylation. Lots of 'transient' things can change the structure of DNA. If you think about it a bit, it makes sense. The 'Central Dogma' (which for years has been barking up the wrong tree) states that DNA makes RNA which makes Protein and DNA loops back and makes itself. While certainly true, it is too coarse of an approximation to be really useful. DNA changes in response to the environment (the topic here), RNA amplifies and interferes with pretty darn near everything, the environment can directly act on germ cell lines (again, via DNA methylation).

So yes, thinking (which at the molecular level requires at the very least RNA and protein production) can, through methylation and other mechanisms, control gene expression both in the organism and in progeny.

Nature has had several billion years to mess around with this. It's fantastically complex

Maybe you should move to China and work for Foxconn. Them perhaps someone would care about you.

No, what we're really waiting for is a decent battery. To get all of the functionality that we want in a watch sized object AND have it last more than 6 hours is beyond the pale at present.

To keep the power budget down, we're making too many compromises.

Careful throwing numbers around. We have absolutely no idea how accurate that figure is. Could well be 'Bollywood Accounting', could be something made up by a bureaucrat flunky. Could even be real.

It does presage an era where there are potentially a large number of groups, both government and private, with the capability of launching commercially and strategically significant payloads into LEO or geosynchronous orbit.

(Raises pinky.)

Further, not everything landing at an airport is as large or as robust as a commercial jet aircraft. A light plane could easily be severely damaged by a small UAV. Likely, no - I've been in small planes hit by birds - we've survived but it's not a given.

UAVs have no business anywhere in a controlled airspace unless they are under control of a qualified operator AND other pilots know it's in the air. Now, that doesn't answer the question whether somebody should (or shouldn't) be allowed to play with their Phantom II in the neighborhood park. Those things, with the operator using a modicum of common sense, are pretty safe. The problem is the phrase 'modicum of common sense'. We all know that some random jackass is going to lose control of the thing, turn a poodle into poodle-chops or knock a Vespa into oncoming traffic.

While the cretins in /b/ might think it funny, the rest of the planet might take offense at that sort of behavior. Hence, regulation.

This is why it's hard to have nice things.