Historically speaking, google is one of the least likely companies to actually sue using their patents compared to any other large company. Barring situations in which someone else is already suing them over a stupid patent, and them pulling one out to say OK you are infringing on X call it even. Not saying they are perfect, but within the industries they are fighting in, google is usually the least retarted about patents.

right, but that's the thing. Humans do have to commit some extent of the tables etc... into their memories, How much space humans can devote to it, of course varies human to human, but saying a human can use them, and a computer can't would be hypocritical. Unless we can quantify exactly how many tables the grandmaster has memorized, and forced the computer to use that exact quantity.

I'd have to fully agree with you. Nintendo's stregnth has more or less always been creating a new technology for a console, and then tossing out a line of first party titles to demonstrate how to proporly utilize the technology. Quite simply I do have to say it is very probable that in the event that they do not produce the gadgets, their games will lose their appeal, as you mentioned, sega is a pretty clear demonstration of what could happen to nintendo. Sega went from an era of which the dreamcast was worth the purchase for many, even with pretty much nothing but sega's first party titles to show for it (yes the dreamcast sold poorly, but I would say few if any who purchased it, felt it was a bad purchase). To the sega of today, in which the only ones of their games that are even worth purchasing, are the re-released dreamcast games. With that I must say I really don't want to see nintendo go that route. Your insights make sense though, if nintendo did something like create the wiimote for the PS3, have the hardware bundled with super mario galaxy etc... (this is a time travel hypothetical scenerio, if the wii never existed, then there wouldn't be a move), That may have been a functional direction to go, and perhaps similar could happen. Nintendo would need to produce just enough "hardware" to keep the developers feeling as they are developing on their own territory.

It all depends on the bias of the teacher... in america, something like 40% believe in a litteral 6 day creation less than 10,000 years ago. Those numbers aren't significantly different in grade school or high school teachers. There are schools in america right now that flat out don't teach evolution... They skim by it on the day... say "ok class, if you want to read up on evolution it's on page x-y on your text book... I will not test you on it just check the box saying you read it and you are golden.

I myself was raised creationist.... when you actually hear the creationist arguements etc... as a 4th grader, they actually sound pretty logical. They really take about a high school level education to see through, and I never really confronted the facts again after 4th grade, it wasn't until I was in my 20's that I looked back and realized how much bull it was.

I've seen this one several times... one thing truely lacking... any comment or response or acceptance of the debate from Bill Nye. The appropriate headline is "Ken Ham opens doors for debate against Bill Nye". Now odds are IMO Bill shouldn't or won't agree to this debate without first and foremost... getting his own crew in there to record and have the interview posted in it's entirety (ham is basically setting this debate up in his own turf... no information for his moderator choice etc.... Ken Ham is quite likely to basically have this happen on his stage... post the video to youtube edited and butchered to make it look like Nye couldn't answer his questions, or have a moderator or any other means to prevent Nye from speaking. Odds are Ken Ham will not allow Bill Nye to debate in a form that Bill Nye can actually teach the audience. Ken Ham is going to set himself a win/win situation... Nye attends, Ham chops and edits the only permitted footage so it looks like Nye lost. Nye requests independant recording etc... ham will refuse that in his museum. Nye refuses, Ham will boast of how Bill Nye is afraid to debate a real creationist.

"failure to file tax returns"

Just being a person doesn't mean you can go to prison, just ask Bain capital, or wells fargo, or bank of america, none of those people have faced any jailtime

Of course, I suppose it depends on how much they get on the former slavery lawsuits... if they don't have money... yeah those monkeys will be in jail in hours.

Umm... have you actually read the 10 commandments? and assume they are all towards public good etc? The first 4 of them are entirely meaningless to a non-christian, 6-9 are blatently obvious to any human being regardless of religion, and 5 and 10 have some serious problems.
1. you shall have no other gods before me
yeah... I don't think that one quite fits a secular government like the united states
2. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image
yeah same problem here
3. Don't take the lords name in vain
Uhh.... ok still haven't gotten to anything about the good of humans yet
4. Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy
Are we seeing a pattern here yet?
5. Honour thy father and thy mother
woo half way through and one with moderate secular value... though also pretty terrible and lacking nuance... we have child abuse laws on the books for a reason
6, 7, 8, 9, Don't kill, commit adultry, steal or bear false witness
ah finally some good reasonable public good commandments that for the most part, aren't bad... admitted any society that didn't figure these basic ones out on their own... would have died out pretty quickly
10. Don't covet your neighbors wife, servants, donkey or other possesions.
not terrible advice... minus the fact that it is phrased in a way, more or less puts a man's wife, donkey and house, are all more or less in the same category.

and what defines a marriage as a childbearing relationship? Does any specific religion hold the naming rights to marriage? Because I'm pretty certain that weddings in some form or another trace back significantly further than any currently doccumented religions... Or lets just pretend we are using the bible as the definition of marriage. How many concubines are we allowed? Oh and how many wives? Next time we invade a country, can we take some wives home with us as god authorized his people to do (provided of course we give the women a few months to grieve, we aren't monsters). Ah right... god updated his definition of marriage to keep up with the times... but the second time it was perfect?

Marriage has been around, longer than humans have been able to record history, and it has always been changing, Humans have had societies consisting of everything from random sex within a set tribe/city, many forms of polygamy etc... One thing most historians agree on, is that 2 permanantly monogomous people, is a fairly uncommon system (if you are factoring in all of the societies that we have knowledge about over the last 10k years). Giving a different name etc... I don't oppose in theory, except that it almost always follows with giving a weaker or less valuable set of rights

an emulator is almost certainly not illegal. Now the 95% of people who use emulators to play games they have not purchased are clear cut illegal. Playing games you own on a platform they were not designed for is a grey area (One I would say morally shouldn't be, but legally it's a grey area, however it basically has precidence protecting it, dating back at least as far as the start of MP3 players).

Is a song any more significant than a blog or any other page? Either one, drawing 400,000 takes either luck, or to produce something so good or so bad that it gets shared/tweeted into active circles etc... in both cases the off the charts money makers, are the creations that seem to have taken the least effort.

I don't get the reasonable expectation of privacy in a public resteraunt as something new... we have the exact same privacy we've always had since people developed big cities... that is, there is too much information for anyone to reasonably recognize or care about 99.9999999% of the people in the resteraunt. We actually have more privacy than we did 500 years ago, when towns and cities were smaller, and most people knew the others in the resteraunt. It wasn't that long ago that, seeing 50 people, and none of them knowing who you are, was uncommon. That very same mechanism is appropriate for why some random guy video taping the resteraunt, has the same impact on your privacy.. Ok so guy video tapes the resteraunt, an extra 50 people see it, odds of any of them recognizing and knowing and caring who you are is equally slim... your privacy isn't significantly more compromised by the camera, than it was by the 40 people who walked past the glass window out front... As far as I can tell, the only real noteworthy difference, is that if lightning strikes and one of the people who happens to see you recognizes you, is that person has automatic proof to back up his statement of your presense. Which is of course still not that much different, if you were significant to any of the random passerby's, they'd have pulled out their celphone camera and snapped a picture. Just like why there's hundreds of selfies with random celebreties in the background etc...

The issue, stems down to elementery and middle school. Personally IMO I think it is very similar to why countries have specific olympic events they specialize in... IE there is nothing in the biology that makes kenyans faster runners than other countries, it is that kenyans push their aspiring athletes towards running, because that is the field that the culture cheers. Same goes for smarter women and engineering/coding. Personally I think if the problem is going to be addressed, it needs to be addressed at a much younger age than people are looking. The divide of genders in fields starts by grade school levels... Once you are looking at college and above, you are already working with the 10-20% of women who either don't give a darn about cultural stereotypes and won't be discouraged, and some who are doing it for uninteligent reasons (either chose at random, or specifically because it is stereotyped against)

or recharge your battery, or I suppose wirelessly over the celphone network. I'm estimating stage 4 being a good 15-30 years away. I would say 10 years is extremely optimistic, and IMO within 20 years... we won't likely have much if any gas left.

Hence why I still expect the average being somewhere in the 500-1,000 range. That is fatalities not just accidents. The deaths per year right now is about 30k... right off the bat half of that can be cut out if DUI and road rage were eliminated, Then we are left with pedestrian fault and driver fault. Pedestrian fault will obviously be unchanged. Driver fault I would still imagine being 1/4th as often. I mean lets face it, which happens more often, Windows crashing while you write an excel spreadsheet, or a human making an error on adding manually? Maybe I am overestimating, maybe something like 5,000 is a more reasonable estimate... no matter what I would say at bare minimun, 20,000 lives a year will be saved.

Autonomous cars have to go through 4 phases IMO.

Phase 1: Private testing: IE what google is in now Compile data of every accident or near accident that the drivers saved themselves from by going manual.

Phase 2: Limited beta... IE google gives out 100 cars in the way they do with glass right now, slowly expand until about 5,000 cars are out for a year.

Phase 3: Public beta: This will technically be called release, but this timeframe is really going to be all about collecting massive amount of data, and waiting until autonomous cars are down to about 1% of humans

Phase 4: When we hit actual safety. Manual drive mode will be removed and outlawed. Software updates will become part of the safety inspections required on cars yearly. accident fatalities will drop into the hundreds.