Can we name one of them "Lundmark's Nebula"? Though we'd have to name a star in the other galaxy 'Arisia'...

Is to make rules more stringent, and ban Bananas

They've only just retrieved the thing! Modern equipment is good, but we can't just wave a magic wand/tricorder over some dead mice and get a diagnosis yet.

Well, it's a streaming system not a download-to-not-own DRMed system, so a better comparison would be Pandora, Spotify et al. Personally, I'd rather purchase tracks and have them available offline to do with what I will (plus most of my music is not even available on streaming services, so I couldn't use them if I wanted to), but if you want to avoid the effort and would prefer something closer to a 'custom radio station' then subscription services are much of a muchness. With google backing it, and locked in competition with Apple, I can't see them dropping it anytime soon.

If you're talkimg about regular Google Play music downloads, rather than the newly launched streaming service, those are DRM-free.

Or any of the numerous userscripts that don't require you to go via some shady and superfluous website.

Luxembourg? Works for Amazon.

A sturdy socket, and a 3D printer. While highly dexterous neurally controlled arms and hands are in development, they're far from an off-the-shelf option. For specific uses (e.g. holding various artists tools) you may well be better off with some sort of magnetic socket on a stump cup, and a rack of special purpose end manipulators for each tool.

Then there's the infamous 'fat electron', which becomes stuck in kinked wiring.

Boot-to-desktop, and some way to categorise/group the tiles on the start screen. I don't really want a return to the 'program-in-a-folder-in-a-folder with piles of uninstall, manuals, help files, tutorials, demos, etc links lying about the tree at random' approach of the start menu, but some sort of organisation beyond just vaguely dragging things about would be nice.

What you are describing is called 'motion interpolation' It is a fundamental part of the last few generations of video CODEC, and the current crop of commonly in-use CODECs (h.264, VP8, ASP) all implement it.

The big problem with 'magic' video enhancers is that mathematically, CODECs are already very, very good at identifying easy to optimise bits of video, so anything your algorithm does is either totally redundant, or just makes things harder to compress (and thus lower quality at the same bitrate, or the same quality requiring a higher bitrate). Identifying what looks good to the human eye, however, is something much harder to do algorithmically. x.264's psy-optimisation was worked out more through iterative trial-and-error than any sort of mathematical system (hence why encoding to optimal PSNR or SSIM is pretty stupid if a human is going to be watching the end-video).

I'd have gone for the more relevant MASK.

I've seen a whole lot of video enhancement 'algorithms', boxes, programs, etc. Not one of the press-button-get-video variants have actually improved video quality, and almost universally they just make things worse; more often than not, they just shove up contrast and saturation and add an unsharp mask, but some are genuinely innovative in their uglyness (e.g. the dreaded WarpSharp, Q-Tec's BD butchery, etc). The vast majority of 'easy to use' variants, with a few sliders to move about or checkboxes to flip, are equally ineffective.

Do you have any examples of your 'algorithm' that show it to be something other than run-of-the-mill?

Running on something other than H2 outside the lab is a breakthrough You can't rely on your cryogenic fuel to cool your engine, you need to build a chamber that will handle massive shockwaves at hilarious temperatures.

The Intercooler operates on a Helium loop, but the loop is closed: it is the Hydrogen fuel that provides the cooling, and no Helium is lost in operation. Additionally, the Intercooler, the hardest part of the engine, has been tested successfully. The rest is running turbines and a rocket on H2, which has been done numerous times in the past.

The big barrier is that it doesn't scale down well at all: you can't built a small vehicle that you can actually use for launching anything, you have to stump up the cash to build the full thing if you want any sort of return on investment.

And since pretty much everyone owns 'fire & forget' missiles that identify, discriminate, lock on and home into targets under on-board terminal guidance, why would anyone want to ban autonomous lethal robots? They've owned and operated them (in anger!) for decades.