Why not copyright original insults. They can be directed to a subset of the offended group for rating, and then follow Hasselton's scheme. Any AC insults from this site that are passed on without retribution would be sent to Hasselton directly. Then he can repost them as Hassetons, a class of stolen insults.
Iff black holes can briefly upset the Higgs energy balance and put it in a new state, there is at least a possibility that that same process can be used to harvest very large energies from the vacuum state. Of course, I don't know whether the new temporary Higgs state will be at higher or lower energies that the nromal state, but I assume they will be higher.
Does it involve a new tax? Hmmm.
The instruments measuring the stances of US political parties, need a recalibration. The bucket-type sensors do not agree with the pocketbook-type sensors. Furthermore, there are no error bands, so the statistics must be based on a sample size of 1.
Political science is an oxymoron.
10% significance level is not enough to support a carbon tax. 90% might be.
Does any billion dollar company get that big without government support? Microsoft's original MS-DOS contract, IBM's slaes to every agency, Apple's presumed security backdoor, GM's Hummer sales, Ford Aerospace, etc, etc.
The complex relations among government agencies and large corporations is endemic. Elon Musk is no exception.
One solution is to wire communities with DC micronets, and the electronics to connect those to controlled phased grid transformers at one central location. DC micronets save the home owners the expense of sync circuits in each house, and their installations are cheap enough to save the cost of the micronet in at least some communities.
Later, the DC micronets can implement their own energy storage solutions at the same grid connection site.
Put your data on SD chips, more than one chip in case there are errors, in a decent metal/glass vacuum thermos bottle in your fire-proof safe. Bury another thermos bottle in your back yard. One of them will survive.
RTFA. There isn't enough fossil fuel in the world to equal the effects of the that extinction. The rate of acidification has oi taper off soon. Another false doomsday headline masking a contrary scientific finding.
Easy to invent a language, hard to invent a real and useful language. Language is tied to the structure of the brain and its speech, visual and motive centers. Learning a useful language involves touching, experiencing and moving. Unless the parties to a verbal exchange share these fundamental experiences, communication is ambiguous. That's why languages evolve slowly over time along with populations, and they stagnate in isolated communities.
There may be a hardwired language-based operating system in the human brain, something like "Snowcrash". Esperanto follows most of those rules. Klingon does not.
As an interesting tidbit, new words and expressions tend to be invented and spread primarily by young teen females. Youwzah!
They can be made safe without government regulation. They can carry transponders. They can carry radar reflectors and show up on airport radars. Over time I'm sure regular flyways will be established, the same as footpaths and roadways were in the past. These can be mapped to 3D GPS. All of this is current technology.
The trick is NOT killing every possible new tech because of some imagined danger, but ironing out the bugs. That is exactly what Amazon wants to do.
By the the standards you claimed, we would not have air travel because of the possibility of 9-1-1.
Witch Central Delivery, a proposed new startup, will compete with Amazon to deliver mail by owls and packages by eagles. They will not be remote controlled (but under carefully supervised spells) and will not have to answer to the FAA, unless the FAA proposes that owls and eagles all be grounded until they can come up with a bipartisan regulation covering birds.
This should be a big improvement over the existing government approved drones, which are primarily used to carry bombs and surveillance prior to kill orders.
You forgot about the ease of delivering that 5 pound block of C4 plus detonator to pretty much anybody that ordered it. It isn't even "just" the Amazon drones. Anybody can capture an Amazon drone (or build their own copy and paint it accordingly) and use it to make a "special delivery" to, well, pretty much anyone. "Special Delivery, Mr. President! It's those "books" you ordered from Amazon!"
You can pack a whole lot of evil into 2 kg of C4 (or whatever the latest/greatest compact explosive is) plus detonator. You can saturate any reasonable defensive system by having 100+ drones attempt a delivery at the same time. You can carpet bomb crowded marketplaces - the drone itself will conveniently supply the shrapnel, or you can fly the drones under cars or into glass-front buildings before detonating. And best of all, you can do it in complete anonymity and safety! The drones will be impossible to track back to a point of origin, flying literally under the radar and in numbers too great to track anyway. You can rent a barn or warehouse, ship in as many amazon-a-likes as you can, load them with Sarin, with Anthrax, with weaponized Ebola or with powdered radioactive waste, or -- what the heck -- with all of these at once, to saturate and overwhelm even emergency response systems with multiple distinct threat vectors, and after launching them with a program that directs them to converge on a given target from all directions after initially moving on "delivery" trajectories to a spread of locations, "
None of your comments apply to any regulations postulated by the FAA. You are confusing dangerous possibilities from people with criminal intent with beneficial uses by responsible parties. It is not in Amazon's interest to accrue liabilities from drone crashes. They will be sued for their back teeth and they know it. On the other hand, criminals will not follow FAA regulations whatever they are.
It is perfectly reasonable to allow Amazon the time and space to work out any glitches in a safe region of the US.
Great comment. Thanks.
Computers are unreliable, but humans are even more unreliable. Any system which depends on human reliability is unreliable. -- Gilb