Are you assuming that each drone will self destruct after dropping of a new SSD drive in the rooftop mailroom chute at an office building? I expect they're planning to use the same drone more than once. Sort of like we use UPS trucks at least three or four times before destroying them.

You're right. The whole idea should be completely scrapped.

OF course it would make local news if Little Johnny got killed because he wandered behind a backing-up UPS truck in the street. Tragic accident, negligent parents, etc. But if a 20-pound drone gets clobbered by a Canada Goose and falls onto Johnny's head, making him exactly as dead as the UPS truck would have, it would be front and center in countless national/international news outlets. You know this is true.

Suing is common, yes. And it's worth handing over cash to avoid law suit expenses. Which has nothing to do with actual liability.

Really? Do you have any idea how idiotic that idea actually is? Should the CEO of GM go to jail when you run your Chevy over a pothole, blow out a tire, lose some steering control, and cause an accident? Do you really think that?

You're confusing the words "can't" and "wouldn't."

There was nothing stopping someone from shooting your horse, or from locking up your car's engine block by shooting it, today, right now. I'd rather replace some onboard electronics than an engine block, wouldn't you? But the distinction is academic. Because it's all about what people do, not which tool people use. EMP weapons and guns don't shoot horses and cars, people do. The expectations and limitations are cultural, not technological.

No, I don't. I responded pointedly to an irrational comment. I echoed that person's tone to help them see how ridiculous they were being. You compounded that person's shrill nonsense by adding more. You can't be so obtuse to have missed the point, so the only alternative is that you're just trolling. And again, just now. So, you have fun with that.

Wow, you really have trouble with communication, don't you?

It sure as hell is! So, just drive it on your own fucking road, right?

Yeah.

No. Your use of that mis-shaped phrase (wrapped in asterisks, no less) served to draw my eye away from your intended communication, and to the typing that made me question whether you think about what you say. My first reaction isn't to read the rest of your post, but to dismiss it as having come from someone who doesn't care about his communication. I took the time to respond because I think it's one of those lazy communication tics that it would be nice to see less frequently as it dumbs down discourse and chips away at the value our culture places on thoughtful interaction.

You're missing the point. He says he deliberately mis-spells "a lot" (and then surrounds it with asterisks) so that people will notice him and take him more seriously. I'm saying that's silly, and erodes his credibility when he's talking academics. As for sound-copying... why else do you think that people say, for example, "I could care less" - ? Obviously they mean the opposite, but those are the sounds coming out of their mouths, and it's not done ironically. What's your theory?

Hence the reference to 2015. That's when the FAA says they'll have the regs sorted out.

I can hardly think of a better destination than a busy office tower or large apartment building. They have mail rooms. Put a small annex room on the top floor, and use the Amazon Coal Chute for deliveries from the roof - straight to the guy in the mail room. The drone can fly to a known collection of rooftop destinations with much less fuss than they would to random residences/businesses "on the ground."

Sure. That Methane Clathrate is at the bottom of the sea, so it can't possibly do any harm.

Those scientists should stop messing about with things like the bottom of the ocean. If God wanted us to know about stuff on the bottom of the ocean he'd have put that bit on top.

I don't remember ever being at a party where someone trying to make a pseudo- academic point about mythology use air quotes and deliberately tried to convey to me that the term "alot" was one word, and being used that way so that I'd take him seriously on the mythology thing. Are your parties like that?

I think you've got the wrong end of the stick. I think anything sounds homogeneous to someone who doesn't listen carefully, e.g., someone who doesn't care for the genre.

When Charlie Parker went out for chicken and waffles after a gig, he used to listen to country music on the juke box. This was Charlie Parker arguably the greatest god in the serious jazz fanatic's pantheon. When the other musicians would complain that country music was corny, Bird would simply say, "Listen."

The problem with the recording industry is that it is not in the business of producing music. It is in the business of producing and exploiting hits. I had this epiphany when struggling with the iTunes Store one day. "Why is the interface so bad? Why do they make me fight my way to what I want to buy?" Then it hit me: the iTunes Store was trying to steer me to what everyone else was buying. It's part of the hit industry.

It's no wonder that kids listen to music on YouTube these days. True, it's *free*, but to me there's an even bigger advantage. It finds me what I want, even if its a bit odd and even (gasp) non-commercial. The other day I was reading an old murder mystery got a hankering to listen to some old English music hall songs. That's practically a major project on iTunes but on YouTube you just pop "British Music Hall Songs" in the search box and Bob's your uncle.