... I don't see this covered in any of the mainstream media reports, but the 'drone' involved was a pink 'barbie' knockoff with no video capability. It's a $25 dollar think-geek type mini gyro. I'm amazed it made it to the 2nd floor window of a home outside. No wonder it crashed, those things have the stability of a paper airplane thrown into a fan.

Example of it:
http://www.amazon.com/33013-Concept-Alloy-Helicopter-Light/dp/B009VCHVJQ/ref=sr_1_3?s=toys-and-games&ie=UTF8&qid=1389974986&sr=1-3&keywords=pink+gyro

"Obviously the pilot of the drone had some surprise..."

Obviously the pilot couldn't see you because there's no cameras on it, so I doubt she was surprised you looked out the window....

...because the drone wheeled around and crashed ..."

They do that a lot.

The irony here is Feinstein over dramatization of this event given what she authorizes on the SIC. Using this incident to call for stricter drone laws is like being hit by a paper airplane and calling for the FAA to investigate.

I think the person who wrote that article recently return from hospital, after an accident on holiday.

Love my mocha's. Can't tell you how many times I got to a 'local' coffee house and get a crap mocha. Some like to put store bought chocolate syrup in it, others like to add a mocha powder without first turning it into a wet paste. I've had Swiss Miss packets added to a late and told this was their 'Cafe Mocha'.

All in all, I can count on one hand the number of good cafe mocha's I've had at 'local' coffee houses.

On the other hand, every Starbucks I got into, anywhere in the world, seems to have the same Cafe Mocha. It's as if they had a recipe and the barista's were trained to make it. I like being in a town for the first time in my life, finding a Starbucks and feeling a little bit like being at home.

In the end, I reward any store on it's quality, I don't stereotype a store based on it's number of locations or perceived local community value. Would you patron a crap restaurant just because it's "local"?

Grandparent was informative, but parent is correct. .357 has about 25-30% more velocity than a comparable grain 9mm ( 125g vs 124g).

The other difference is .357 rounds don't need to feed smoothly into a chamber via a semi-auto mechanism ( I know that there _are_ .357 semi-autos but they are rarely seen outside of a gun show). Sitting in a barrel allows their bullet geometry to be pretty much anything and not jam. The physical design of the bullet can obviously play a large part in the characteristics of the wound.

If I had to be shot by either a 9mm or a .357, I'd take the 9mm, and hope for a clean exit.

I recall a few years ago participating with a lot of others in a crowd source effort to categorize fuzzy pictures of possible galaxies. I think it was galaxy zoo.

So is this the result of our effort? Would be nice to know...

Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn.

We go through this every time there is a DARPA challenge:

5 Intellectual Property
DARPA claims no rights to software developed by Open Track competitors as a result of participation in the CGC. DARPA does not intend to disclose the CQE and CFE Technical Papers outside the Government, with the following exception: CGC Technical Papers may be handled by DARPA support contractors for administrative purposes and/or to assist with technical evaluation. All DARPA support contractors performing this role are bound by nondisclosure agreements. DARPA does not intend to disclose CGC Technical Papers to contractors to duplicate, commercialize, or for reprocurement or reverse engineering purposes.

Do you think all the participants of the past DARPA grand challenges relating to autonomous vehicles have given away their IP? Of course not. Those teams that pushed through have made lucrative deals with car manufacturers and others.

All DARPA want's to do is spur innovation. A challenge like this is essentially a heads up that in 5 years they'd like to spend a lot of money on procuring services like these. In the past, they'd just give someone the money to build it, and maybe it worked, maybe it didn't. At least now it's a bit more market driven.

Also, i'm not sure if anyone else picked up on this, but he was giving out his box.com account credentials to clients so they could upload straight to the folder.

I gave them the email addresses of several people with whom I had shared files over the years, thinking maybe the account had been mistakenly assigned to them.

Hrrmm? that's odd. Why would you even think because you sent someone a link to your cloud shared folder that the cloud company would magically given them the account...unless you didn't send them some link....

My lovely and talented wife, with whom I collaborate on stories for Family Circle (where we used Box.com a lot), had apparently invited an employee of this PR firm to upload an image to one of our shared folders last April

Ahh, now this language seems a bit too obtuse. "Invited an employee to upload an image". At first glance, you'd think you send this PR employee a link and they uploaded to your box.com folder. But you can't do that with box.com.... Only way to let someone upload to your folder is via an E-mail ( which won't work for large files ) or the 'upload widget' which you have to host on a website and it's up to you to lock it down ( he didn't use this either ). Failing that, YOU HAVE TO GIVE YOUR ACCOUNT USERNAME/PW TO THE PERSON TO UPLOAD TO YOU.

They probably pulled all the accounts used from an IP range known to be the PR firm, and assumed that's "PR Firms" employees. Since this employee had the username/pw, what else were they to assume.

Not a brilliant move on Box.com's part, but also, a stupid move on this writers part.

Most of these large cloud storage apps make it difficult for someone else to 'contribute' (upload) files. Otherwise they get abused for warez or porn.

Long story short, this guy violated their terms of agreement and gave away his username and password and was amazed when his files disappeared.

If he wasn't a tech writer, they would have written him off and rightly so. If anything, this is "Treat me different, I'm the press" mentality.

I'd take a short story on a few of his Halloween parties. I imagine it reads like 120 days of sodom....

Not all are locked. It wasn't illegal to switch cars on the subway until 2005. And then it became a 75 dollar fine.

The ones that are locked are the newer models which the locks can be controlled by the conductor. Also, only the trains that have extreme turns or spots where there is a very large gap between the cars, get locked.

The 1/2/3 line weren't locked last time I hit a car with no AC in the summer.

Also, on the 1 line for south ferry you have to move between cars because only the first 5 reach the platform... Not sure how they handle this these days.