Yeah, but it's pretty messy. I mean, have you ever shoveled coal? I wouldn't want that in my house.
They've had a link to pre-owned roadsters for awhile. Of course, it's rare to actually find one, dammit...
Well, it could launch a hypersonic drone to deliver your Q-Tips and AAA batteries when you're visiting Suriname.
If you want a tattoo on your wrist, either put it on the wrist where you wouldn't wear a watch [...]
But I don't need a watch! I've got a phone!
Agreed. Now-a-days, they're the choice of old people.
Apple's saying that BLOOD ONLY REFLECTS RED is bullshit.
Agreed, but I think you're being pedantic. Blood reflects mostly red and I assume that is how they use it.
Perhaps those robots were less advanced than Amazon's robots
Yes. Yes we were.
Robot probes are far better science for the buck
The Apollo manned missions returned 2200 moon rocks, soil, and core samples weighing 382 kilograms. Soviet lunar probes returned 2 samples of soil weighing 0.362 kilograms. The Apollo program cost $20 billion. The Luna program's estimated cost was $4.5 billion.
So we spent 4.5x the money and got 1000x the samples. Whether the "science" was better because of this is debatable, but at least by one measure, your theory doesn't necessarily pan out.
To me, the advantage of probes is that, individually, they are easier, cheaper and quicker than a manned mission. If I were a middle-aged scientist wishing to confirm a theory about Mars, I'd rather have a probe that would arrive in 8 years than I waiting another 30 years and, assuming I was physically able to make the trip, be able to test out my theory on the surface of the planet.
Yes, you take a performance hit when you emulate but if your computer is speedy you don't notice.
On the other hand, if your "computer" (i.e., cell-phone, tablet) is not speedy, you will. And if your computer uses batteries, you will also notice.
And Cargo spacecraft are not--unless you count the Shuttle, which is no longer flying.
Well, if it walks like a taxicab and talks like a taxicab, how is it not a taxicab? Because you signal it with a hep and cool app instead of making a phone call?
Actually, that's one change I'd like to see--there has to be more than one licensed driver in the vehicle in order to use the carpool lane. You're not really removing a car from the road if the people you're transporting can't drive.
He also was involved in Google Street View Everest [...]
So it was work-related.
We — the readers and viewers — know (sort of). The policeman doing the illegal deed in fiction knows just as much as the real cops in TFA knew.
It's that "sort of" that makes the difference, however.
Again, movies tend to make it simple. Take something like torture in "24." We're generally forgiving because, hey, we know the bad thing is going to happen. We know that whoever Jack Bauer is torturing is the right person because for the last 3 episodes we saw him scheming with the other bad guys. And, finally, we want to get on with the story and to do that, our hero needs to know this stuff (that we, the audience, already know). Since it's fiction--and we know it's fiction--we know that nobody is really getting hurt so it's no big deal.
Again, real life tends to be more complicated. Yes, the Cops knew that this guy was a drug dealer, but was he really? Depends on how much you trust the police.
Don't get me wrong--there are idiots out there who can't really separate fact from fiction or imagine a real-world scenario based on the movies. I remember when the US Government was talking about torture and a scenario that sounded right out of 24 with the old, "Wouldn't torture be okay then?"
proving most of the society as [...] tools of the manipulators [...]
Well, movies are supposed to manipulate your emotions. That's why they have soundtracks and the like. Fiction does that.