I'm surprised that the paper (http://arxiv.org/pdf/1504.02165v1.pdf) required 15 co-authors. It seems like the sort of thing I'd give to an undergrad to write once somebody figured it out...
More fluid, except that they use fuel (RP-1) as the hydraulic fluid, so after it flows from the high pressure tank through the hydraulic system they can dump it into the main fuel tank to reuse.
How? Genetic Engineering. Much faster than waiting around for Natural Selection. And much more ethical than Artificial Selection (Eugenics).
The assertion that foraging people "traditionally didn't develop high blood pressure, atherosclerosis, or cardiovascular disease" needs a big 'Citation Needed' mark.
This Slate article does a great job of explaining how decades of peer reviewed papers on the Inuit all make the mistake of assuming lower cardiovascular disease based on a flawed assumption in a single paper in the 1970s:
They could get better and better satellites with higher resolutions, and continuously lobby the US government to allow higher resolutions to be released.
Or they could use planes, and StreetView cars... Like they currently do.
even if sentenced
Assuming 300M people in the US are innocent people, or at least innocent of a capital crime, sentencing 0.025% of innocent people to death would execute 75000 people. That's about 1000x the current rate of executions, so I think it would be worse than current efforts.
Unless you meant that 0.025% of people sentenced to death being innocent would be better then current efforts. That one's probably true.
I seem to recall reading that the Iron Dome missiles were in the thousands of dollars per shot range, though with several sent after every target rocket. They only try to shoot down incoming rockets that will actually hit an occupied area, though.
Well, as this is cold enough for Carbon Dioxide to freeze, I imagine it gets a cool witch's cauldron effect when it warms up for the summer...
Yes, I'm trying to be funny.
And of course Darwin was wrong in some respects. He was just much more correct than anyone before him.
Score one for Lamarkian evolution. (And epigenetics). I knew Darwin was wrong...
Yep, another case of the FBI finding a 'terrorist' by finding a mildly disgruntled guy, giving him fake weapons and explosives, suggesting a terrorist plot to him, and then 'catching' him when he did exactly what they wanted him to do.
I imagine the first terms to be added could be something like "Company Confidential, Do Not Copy" or "Sensitive Business Information".
That said, copiers already block copying of certain patterns, such as US currency. With a little trial and error it's not hard to figure out exactly what on the dollar bill is being matched. Just add it to your documents, and no body will even be able to print them. (Careful, as some brands of printers will lock themselves and require a service call after you try to copy money.)
The assholes have definitely taken over
My friend who used to contribute a lot in terms of articles and even money decided to stop because the deletionist assholes made it such a pain for him that he now despises the site. And although almost none of his contributions were deleted, he hated the way half his time was spent arguing with deletors about his work.
Even Jimbo Whales has experienced this. He started an article on Mzoli's Meats , a butcher shop and restaurant in South Africa. When it was almost speedily deleted, he told the deletors to "excuse themselves from the project and find a new hobby.". In other words, get a life and stop ruining the project. Unfortunately, a bunch of editors added information to the article so it's now kept, saving Jimbo from having to confront either the bitterness many have felt in getting their work destroyed or remaking policy so that people like my friend would continue contributing.
These asshole admins are really making Wikipedia a crappy site, and their effect on valuable editors is worse than what any nasty vandal might do since admins are part of the power hierarchy. This is another valuable lesson in what happens when you give thoughtless small minded people a little power. They make their pronouncements and mass annihilations without any consideration on what the effect might be on a person who has spent sometimes hundreds of man hours creating, maintaining, and protecting his/her articles. They dismiss people by spouting some arbitrary interpretation of policy backed up by their cabals, while those who have better things to do like actually create content get fucked over. James Derk of The Daily Southtown wrote an article where he talks about having a similar experience.
Also, here's a good Slashdot thread illustrating the intellectual dishonesty of the deletionist admins. It is part of the Slashdot story Call For Halt To Wikipedia Webcomic Deletions which is filled with former contributors testifying to their own treatment at the hands of these assholes. It's sad how some people seem to really get off on destroying the work of others.
I think it's interesting how when I don't know about a subject, editing an article on it would be considered vandalism. But it's perfectly OK for the deletors to destroy work relating to things they often know nothing about. Sometimes they even use their very ignorance as justification.
I think Wikipedia has a choice right now. Allow a lot more in than they are currently doing and piss off the deletionists, or let these deletionists have their way and piss off the content creators(And I should add, it's not only deleted articles that are targeted, but plot synopses, trivia sections, clearly permissible images, etc. have all succumbed to the slash and burn mentality of these deletionists.). So Jimbo, who would you rather keep around?