All things aren't understood in nuclear science. The theory is well established but the practice i.e. the actual implementations are still second rate. Just look at the history of uranium separation as an example. 100x reduction in energy separation costs from going to centrifuges and probably another 10x reduction by going to laser separation processes which might also be useable to separate plutonium from waste in the future.

As for reactors there was talk of high-temperature reactors to produce hydrogen which is a useful product for producing ammonia for fertilizer and explosives without using natural gas or petroleum but that will probably stop being developed now that NA has a lot of those resources. Most work will probably be in making reactors safer or cheaper. Not exactly exciting work.

The X-.ray hafnium apparatus has been tested and it seems to be pseudo-science i.e. quackery. It was the rave like a decade ago.

The problem with atomic reactors on airplanes has always been weight. Even when SAC was trying to use it in large bombers. Until someone develops lightweight shielding it won't happen. I do not think this is impossible. But the funding certainly seems to be scarce. The curious thing is that since the DOE took charge of reactor development from the military all development has stagnated. I think this is because the military actually has real applications in mind so they end up producing viable products unlike the DOE.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rabbit_starvation

Yeah but the issue with eating rabbit is that it lacks an essential protein for the building of heart muscle. It is ok to eat it occasionally but if you eat that as your only protein source you start getting nutritional deficiencies. Chicken does not have that issue.

Having an OS installed that is not getting any more security updates is not a "future cost?"

People will reflexively scoff at this, but it's Puritanism. If you're a good God-fearing person, you'll have willpower and be able to lose weight. If you're fat, it's because you're a bad person. Doctors have prescription power because they're a different kind of better person. Why should a good person give a bad person something that will encourage them to still be a bad person?

Americans (at least) refuse to accept how pervasive the basic concepts of Puritanism are in our society. The "head & up, good, below the head, bad" attitude is everywhere and irrational. Read some Thaddeus Russell before you disagree.

I think it's tigervnc-server.

Yeah, and the latest build finally adds support for ID3 ratings tags, so you can truly go cross-player with your ratings.

Now I just need to re-rate 16,000 songs for the eleventh time...

So, it won't work on remote X, or VNC, or xpra, etc.

I just stared it under VNC (Fedora 19/KDE). Not sure about the others.

Most importantly, Congress can't simply repeal a provision of a treaty, which is why it's so much better for industry to get their welfare written into a treaty rather than a statute. The next election could threaten their favorite statute (in theory anyhow).

How about the guy who wants to give you better instead of less?

(Not that I know who that is, but it's not impossible. "Less" just seems like a lazy facile overarching non-solution.)

It is just a matter of finding correct monetization strategy.

Just look at the pie charts - Pandora already has the system in place for music discovery, which is the coordination problem that the corporate model provided one solution for. Once bands don't need corporate music middlemen, they can get half of the revenue, or more.

I've heard a bunch of great stuff on Pandora that I'd never heard _of_ before. Apparently there were a bunch of rock bands in the early 70's that achieved very little commercial success but recorded lots of fantastic music. I assume they each got a little piece of each of the thousand times Pandora played me the same blasted ad for an Intel ultrabook (which are overpriced).

Getting new bands into the new system is the challenge. Their odds are low with the A&R man, so going into something like Pandora makes a bunch of sense. Pandora even has the filtering technology in place to detect the turkeys.

Of course a random op-ed on RWW carries more credence than an entire industry, right?

Doesn't the concept of "effective" mean that code breaking the DRM cannot exist?

The very concept of DRM is a form of corporate welfare. It's as 'effective' as the enforcing government wants it to be.