I couldn't agree more!

While I agree with almost everything Dawkins says, there's something about the way he delivers that almost makes me want to become a religious fundamentalist, just to spite him.

Sagan always left me feeling informed, with my mind opened.

Why? Nobody who works in advertising really needs to be in an office today, never mind in 15 years time. It's perfectly possible for any such office worker to work from home, and be more productive, right now, today, with the technology currently available..

You'd really think that 15 years in the future even the dumbest members of society (e.g. ad execs) would have figured out that the really do not need to waste money on expensive office buildings, waste economic resources and pollute the environment with unnecessary commutes, causing frustration and fatigue in the process.

The only thing stopping that happening right now, is bad management and the vacuous waste of carbon atoms that are HR staff. With better technology available in 15 years time the need to physically be in the same place as someone you are working with will be even more preposterous than it is now.

When you're in a third-world country (like Argentina has been since their economic troubles started), or even in third-world-like areas of better countries (like Atlanta, Detroit, St. Louis or Philadelphia), it's very important to maintain constant contact with your valuables.

Spoken like someone who's never been to Buenos Aires.

Argentina isn't exactly third world. Nothing like it. Second world at worst, and similar to many of the less-wealthy European countries at best. It has a relatively low crime rate compared to many US cities.

You run the risk of getting a bag with a laptop stolen anywhere in the world. London, Paris, New York, Detroit, Berlin, Tokyo... etc. And in universities in any of those cities.

Sounds about right...

I will never understand how Yahoo survived the first dot.com bubble. And every year since then, it's become even less clear as to how they are still around. Are they the new AOL? There seems to be a lot of similarities.

so was Space Command.

Doesn't really matter -- you can't copyright a title. Although, you could register it as a trademark, perhaps.

There's plenty of movies with the same title. As long as the content, concept and characters are unique, there's no legal issue.

However, you DO run the risk of confusing your audience and making it harder to search for your movie on the internet, etc., if you use a previously-used title. It may also upset distributors for just that reason.

Having said that, the target demo for this kind of movie does not seem to be one that would respond well to a movie named "Space Command". Do you really think that would impress and interest a 14 year old? Because your distributor will be expecting you to target that demographic, and dropping you like an hot stone if you don't.

Frankly I'm confused that they couldn't scrounge up $100k amongst all those names...

Yes... that's exactly what does not make sense here.

These guys aren't civilians. These guys aren't naive students, fresh out of college; arrogant, idealistic, and with unrealistic dreams, with no sense of demographics, and no experience of making motion pictures -- i.e. your typical kickstarter client.

Getting funding for a motion picture is very difficult if you have no industry connections. However, it is surprisingly easy if you do. In this case, all you would need is a script written by someone with experience (check), some directorial or VFX experience would be good (check), and at least one B-List named actor who has signed a letter of intent. That might not get you all the money you need, but it would definitely get you enough to get started, you could easily get a million or so that way.

Considering they've worked on shows with plenty of actors who are not exactly busy right now, you'd think there's at least one person they can call to get them interested. Admittedly as a writer and vfx designer they'd have little contact with on-screen talent. However, they MUST know people who know people.

If you have experience and some sort of name in the industry you can sell to people who have real money, just as easily as you can sell to some guy on the net with $10.

Ergo... something does not add up here.

Plus the fact, I'm pretty sure most professional distributors would look down on any kickstarter funded project. I would seriously doubt the ability of any kickstarter project to ever get into cinemas. I assume none have as yet, I doubt many ever will.

Admittedly, I am of the opinion that kickstarter is just another parasite that looks to suck the dreams out of the desperate, idealistic and naive. There's no shortage of similar parasites in the industry. And there's no shortcuts to success in the industry. You have a sellable product, or you don't -- it's a business, and that is what most new filmmakers forget. (along with demographics -- it's only teenagers that go to the cinema in enough numbers to make real money from a movie. If your movie doesn't appeal to teens, kiss your profits and distribution deal goodbye).

Because there's no indication that Facebook is falling apart and no major competitor out there to kick their ass? Even Google isn't making a dent in Facebook's ability to further integrate into the rest of the web.

Hmm, no. I very much doubt any of that is true. Facebook is definitely past its peak. It's not actively bleeding users yet, but now that they have a bunch of shareholder to answer to, they will get greedier and even more maliciously corporate.

It's not like Facebook has a loyal fanbase. This is not Apple, nor Google, nor even Microsoft. It's a company that most people use for the sake of convenience, but most people have little respect for -- every change they make results in mass protest, and has done since its inception. Its parasitical nature and disrespect for privacy is well-known throughout the World. Just as with MySpace, people would drop it like an hot stone if another social network had their friends on it.

Now, for now, their friends are not on Google+ -- but that can turn on a dime. All it needs it Google to care about taking that top spot from Facebook. A good six month marketing strategy, some high profile users, and Facebook is a dead as MySpace.

That is all it takes. It can happen. And is very likely to happen at some point in the next 5 years max.

The company will apparently say he is leaving for "personal reasons."

So he's essentially being canned for lying. And they cover this by lying about the reason he's being canned. Well, that makes sense.

Corporations and the people who work for them, deserve each other.

Fort London: The Olympics.

I wonder if the sonic weaponry and SAMs get stood down after the Olympics. My guess is, they don't...

Pretty funny: all those "advantages" can already be had by using public transportation

Let me guess. You live in a city, right?

And it is true that those advantages exist in public transport for many people who live in cities and work 9-5 or thereabouts, assuming they live and work near a transport node.

However, if you don't... if you live in a small town or out in the country, if you live in a city but your work is in a neighboring suburb and not in the city center, if you work shifts -- especially at night, if you have to transport pretty much anything bigger than a briefcase... then public transport is pretty fucking useless.

And that's for the majority of people, but city dwellers forget that.

The Ancient Aliens Bull Shit network?

Hey, don't knock it, Ancient Aliens is one of the funniest comedy shows on TV. Is the presenter's -- that sports scientist's -- hairstyle, and orange skin, evidence of ancient alien visitors? Some ancient alien researchers believe they are.

Yep, it's pure psychobabble. It's cart-after-the-horse bullshit.

Handedness has nothing to do with hands. It's whether the right or left brain is dominant. There are right brain dominant people who also happen to use their right hands, even though their left eye, or left foot is dominant.

Human Resource Departments: the single biggest brake on the World's economy. The reason for the lack of productivity, innovation and creativity in most large enterprises.

It's a job that nobody with a brain ever wanted to do. Actually, it's a job that nobody ever wanted to do. Nobody ever grows up wanting to work in HR. The only people who do work in HR, are those who have failed. And they bear a grudge.

Which explains why their inhumanity creates situations like this one, and so many similar situations. With the technology currently available, real managers can manage. HR staff need to be fired. All of them, everywhere. The world never really needed them in the first place, but there's no justification for having them now.

The first corporation that has the insight to fire all its HR people will wipe the floor with its competition within 5 years. They will have all the advantages of a small business, mixed with the power of a corporation. And they will have MUCH happier, more productive, employees.

The reason for France being at the forefront of anti-piracy things is Vivendi SA. And it won't make the slightest bit of difference whom is elected president. Vivendi are still there, and still in the pockets of anyone they need to be.

The longevity is not exaggerated, but it is also why the lamps are expensive.

That sounds more like marketing/management speak to me, not engineering. It sounds like a way of justifying planned obsolescence.

Livermore Fire Dept is proof that a well-made bulb can last for over a century. It's just that businesses are not willing to make them. Perhaps that's understandable, but equally, perhaps there's a better way. Either way, let's not pretend this is anything other than making as much money as possible from the longer time taken for the product to fail.

After all, the light bulb industry did pretty much invent planned obsolescence as a business concept.