The scientists in this article are classifying the characteristics of a new heterogeneous material, which is a necessity as the time for breakdown of this material may make it a significant part of the fossil record.
The scientists are not saying it is a new form of rock. Only possibly the submitter or samzenpus are (mistakenly) saying this.
To repeat: RTFA, no new rocks here!
Sadly, considering where that originates from, it's true.
Channeling a magnetic field through a ferromagnetic metallic "skin" (hull plating) will deflect or scatter charged particle weapons or hazards.
Similarly, one could "paint" one of the various forms of materials whose optical properties can be altered by passing electrical current through it. It could be made to be 100% optically absorbent (the same as using two polarized optical filters set at a 90 degree rotation with respect to each other) in order to prevent you being spotted when you're in space. If someone sees you (since you just passed in-between a light source and them), and they shoot lasers at you, you change the polarization to make the material 100% optically reflective, thereby bouncing the laser off your ship.
Any laser much higher or lower in frequency than the visible spectrum (as in beyond IR and UV, which could also be affected by a very small subset of the materials which handles the visible light frequencies) is fairly difficult and inefficient to produce, therefore making it extraordinarily unlikely to be used as a weapon.
"Normal-looking offspring were obtained from all four strains tested."
Link from article http://www.biolreprod.org/content/early/2013/06/25/biolreprod.113.110098.abstract)
One scary a$$ line, indicates a 100% success rate.
You should re-read the abstract to see what it is really saying.
The end result is that they were able to get normal-looking offspring from all four strains tested. However, there was an excessive number of failures in the process in order to get that process. The important line over-looked indicating what it took to get those end results: "cloned offspring were born at a 2.8% birth rate". If you check table 1 of the full article it shows there were a total of 651 embryos cultured in order to get their end results.
This is very far from a 100% success rate.
The aim of the experiment was to see if a clone could be produced from more commonly available cell types. This was a desirable aim due to the fact that it would be less harmful (and/or painful) to the donor than other methods of harvesting material for cloning (which may result in permanent damage or death to the donor).
The viability rate for this method of cloning is still no greater than any other method of cloning in use. It's simply a more humane/ethical method of cloning, nothing greater.
When you read the article, this isn't actually too controversial. All that's being done is changing the timing of of when the measurements are taken and when the intermediate photons become entangled. It's really just using the entanglement process to spread out the time over which the quantum state data is transmitted. You basically have a quantum data historical record.
I can certainly see this opening up useful new capabilities in quantum computing and measurement of quantum phenomena, but it doesn't change our understanding of quantum events and how they interact with our "everyday notions of space and time.".
Hehehe, you're on to something there =)
I wonder if it could be called "hiding" in a legal term if people are capable of recognizing you, but software isn't.
Something that I could pick out with my eyes as a commonality with all 4 models which were "hidden" from recognition: hair coming down the middle of their face. From the looks of the 4th model (the one with the crimson hair in the middle) that's really all that's needed to defeat this program. It doesn't seem like hiding is really that difficult.
Assemble a tesseract.
If it can't do that, it's not a 4D printer, it's just hype about a different 3D printing method.
I remember skipping as a kid. I did it in the local mall when my family did our weekly Friday meal/shopping. I did it when I got to our meeting place while waiting for everyone else. I would skip off looking for them instead of just waiting around.
The thing is, after a month of doing this, I wasn't just skipping, I was leaping. It would be a couple of skips to build up enough rebound and then I was leaping. I was able to cover ground much faster than I would normally running in-and-out of the crowd because I could leap over shorter people (I could jump over my own height, easily bounding onto the concrete planters whose edge-tops were above my height) and keep skipping along at that pace with the rebound energy without tiring anywhere near as fast as running. I would guess looking back at it now that I only used about as much energy as jogging, but got better distance/speed.
I eventually stopped doing it because my older brother kept telling me to stop doing it because it was too embarrassing. I grudgingly complied.
Now that someone else brings it up (I was also naturally very good at broken-field running), I wonder at what the result would have been had I not listened to my brother. Could I have continued on with my skipping/leaping to the point that I built up my muscles and technique to keep up a proportionate increase in my leaping ability and set myself up with a better way to travel through crowds or would I have (much more likely) ended up blowing out my knees and/or ankles since human physiology normally doesn't seem to allow for such feats (as the biochemical reactions that allow great leaping abilities in insects reach a point of diminishing returns as you attempt to scale them up)? Perhaps I'm missing something in my evaluations that people have seen in their research in things such as the materials and techniques used in robotic exoskeletons?
California obviously would be the best for inclement weather., but has an extremely expensive costs for land, rent, and labor with high taxes and earthquakes.
It's not just earthquakes. Taking the state as a whole, California is subject to every natural disaster known to man save for volcanic eruptions. Anybody moving facilities there, when the intent is as close to 100% up-time as possible, is bloody freaking nuts.
I think Schlock cannot be mentioned enough.
The art is better quality than most web comics (or newspaper/dead tree comics), even if the style isn't going for as-real-as-possible. No storyline is ever dropped in the middle (there are cutaways to things happening on the other side of the galaxy, but these are things happening at the same time and the series will then jump right back to the main action).
Not every day has a LOL moment at the end (or during the strip), but that's because something's happening in the strip which is a very much OMG sort-of thing.
And, oh yeah, something else the parent post mentions which I've never seen any other web comic manage: a new comic every single day of the year (and it's never some kind of filler), and has done this since the comic started (which means a huge reading archive). Which means not a single day need go by without the reader getting some form of entertainment on that day.
Another article about this milestone covered #1 & #3 of what you listed.
The self-driving cars have been deliberately kept out of those situations as they are more difficult to handle, but it was noted that they would be using the compiled data to adjust the programming and have those among the tested conditions in the next phase.
As to #2, I haven't read about it being specifically tested, but the programming for such a situation is already in the self-driving cars. They stop to avoid collisions with any object, and slow down (as part of the collision avoidance programming) if an object crosses its intended path in anticipation of another object performing a similar action (like people jaywalking in a major metropolitan area).
With regards to #4, I haven't read anything anywhere that gives a definite answer about how the self-driving cars would (or may have already) handle(d) that situation.
The T-800 isn't a cyborg. The original base entity is a robot, that makes the flesh-covered version an android.
Cameron & Lucas both made the mistake of not knowing what is a cyborg and what is an android.
Android - The original base entity is a robot. Either flesh or another substance made to mimic flesh in some manner is added to conceal or enhance the robot. Examples: Lt. Commander Data, the T-800.
Cyborg - The original base entity is made out of flesh. Technological components are either added to or replace parts of the base entity. Examples: Robocop, Darth Vader.
I believe you're over-thinking the one-dimensional attribute. It simply means they're using a straight-line chain of the molecules in question. There are no molecules in the construct branching off at any other angle, that's all.
No more weak signals because something is blocking line of transmission to the nearest tower.
All I have to do to send the message from my handset is be walking around with an unlicensed particle accelerator strapped to my back. The receiver component, OTOH will need to be carried by my personal valet, The Incredible Hulk.
I wish that it was possible to mod something up further than 5 in special cases, because the post from hellkyng really is giving the best advice for what you want to do, namely making sure that the people whose data is being stored insecurely becomes stored securely. None of the other 5's in the comments are doing that, they're just "Cover your ass" advice.
Now I'm going to mod up the other post that I've seen which gives advice in line with your goals - contact some famous security professionals and see what they have to say.