Bullshit, you're just another stupid racist who wishes that the government would crack down on all of those horrible negros and other people of color. White people, especially white male conservatives are the last people in the world who would want to implement any sort of "honest" profiling scheme because the history of terrorism in America is overwhelmingly white, male and conservative. Don't believe me? Well how about a little terrorist organization called the KKK, which lynched thousands of black men in the early 20th century and terrorized blacks, Catholics, Jews and other minorities to prevent them from voting or moving in to certain areas or taking certain jobs. Then of course we have Tim McVeigh and his crazy militia buddies, the neo-Nazis in Idaho, Bruce and Joshua Turnidge (this story got no media coverage compared to the Boston bombing or the Fort Hood shootings), the asshole who tried blowing up the Martin Luther King Jr. memorial march in Spokane in 2011. While we're at it let's toss in all of the school shooters (Adam Lanza, Kip Kinkel, Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold are all white) and that crazy fuck who shot up the theatre in Aurora. Any honest look at American history shows that white people are mean, crazy dangerous fuckheads and that you should keep an eye on them lest they go batshit insane and start killing everyone in sight. Yeah, if we had profiling in America and it was honest, and not just an excuse used to fuck with people then white guys like you would spend a lot of time getting cavity searched.

People charged with a crime often have a their movements restricted as a condition of their bail.

Yes, people charged with a crime often have their movements restricted as a condition of bail, a fact which has nothing to do with the TSA's idiotic no-fly list. See people who are charged with a crime and who have had their movements restricted have had the benefits of a little thing called due process of law and the fifth amendment to the Constitution. See, if you've been charged with a crime and have had your movements restricted that means that you've been arrested, charged in a court of law, allowed to have counsel to represent you. You can also appeal the judgment that restricts your movements, confront the witnesses against you and you have the right to subpoena witnesses to testify in your favor. You have none of this with the TSA. The TSA restricts your liberty to travel without telling you why they've done so or what evidence they used to make this determination and gives you no opportunity to defend yourself. The TSA no-fly list is essentially nothing more than the imposition of Soviet style internal passports that has nothing to do with protecting citizens and everything to do with restricting their movements.

Do you enjoy sucking government cock?

Every jurisdiction effectively picks and chooses which laws it's going to enforce and when. It's called "prioritizing". And sure enough, that's what the feds are doing:

The memo directs federal prosecutors to focus their resources on eight specific areas of enforcement, rather than targeting individual marijuana users, which even President Obama has acknowledged is not the best use of federal manpower.

The moral and legal value of prioritization is in the results (i.e. who gets targeted and who gets ignored), not the act itself.

Does this law prevent a "computer product" patent "comprising" a recordable medium containing instructions that when executed by a computer processor perform the steps of: a)
do a software emulation of the non-obvious stuff this hardware did.

That's the wording the company's (US) patent lawyers hung on the end of my hardware patents, to keep people from emulating them in FPGAs or software on a really fast processor.

These accidents will likely be mostly minor fender-benders that result in the road-ragers losing their licenses (unless, of course, they get a self-driving car.) Or, That, and you'd also probably see road-ragers driving themselves off the road and into fixed objects. The automatic cars'll generally do a pretty good job of avoiding serious collisions--far better than even a reasonably skillled human driver could.

If a person is so lacking in maturity and self-control that they'd start ramming automated cars for not letting them treat the road as their own personal speedway, it's highly unlikely that these individuals are able to conduct themselves in a mature manner in today's traffic. We're not looking at a substantial net-up of people who have no business driving a car, y'know?

Hurricane Ike produced a similar situation a few years ago. It hit Texas as a very large Category 2, causing far more damage than one would expect from the wind speed.

Not really the same anymore, is it?

Nothing is ever the same. Get used to it. B-)

The bolded part hits the nail on the head for me. In the software development field (as well as management) currently a woman must exert more effort to get noticed so there is a huge selection bias that makes the women more likely to be top of the line, versus your average male manager or programmer. Any woman who isn't gets pushed out of the field or passed over.

We will know when we've arrived when we have a good mix of incompetent, average, and excellent female software developers and managers... Just like we have with men today.

As for why a relatively balanced field (Computer Science) turned into a male-dominated one, I think the period when nerds and geeky stuff weren't cool put a lot of social pressure on women to stay away and now the cycle just perpetuates itself. Even if 29 of 32 guys in a CompSci class are normal non-creepers, as soon as a girl shows up she gets the full attention of the 3 total creepers, who stalk her, follow her around campus, etc... Or the one dude who constantly talks down to her and says software is for guys only. In reality it takes only one asshole to drive the girl away and perpetuate the cycle.

Personally I'd like to see more women entering the field so I try to call out the creepers and assholes whenever I encounter them. One voice of reason often puts a stop to it.

Nobody born and bred in the U.S of A. ends their correspondence with cheers.

Lots of us do - and have for decades.

I've used it in email practically since there's been email - and I was born and raised almost in the center of the "radio accent" heartland.

It's short and often just the right tone for ending a written communication.

Accuracy measures how close the frequency is to the target, on average. Stability measures how the frequency drifts over time (and temperature, etc.). Accuracy is more of an absolute measurement while stability is more of a relative measurement. From the article:

The ticks of any atomic clock must be averaged for some period to provide the best results. One key benefit of the very high stability of the ytterbium clocks is that precise results can be achieved very quickly. For example, the current U.S. civilian time standard, the NIST-F1 cesium fountain clock, must be averaged for about 400,000 seconds (about five days) to achieve its best performance. The new ytterbium clocks achieve that same result in about one second of averaging time.

and

[U.S. civilian standard cesium reference clock] NIST-F1's performance is described in terms of accuracy, which refers to how closely the clock realizes the cesium atom's known frequency, or natural vibration rate. Accuracy is crucial for time measurements that must be traced to a primary standard. NIST scientists plan to measure the accuracy of the ytterbium clocks in the near future, and the accuracy of other high performance optical atomic clocks is under study at NIST and JILA.

So it sounds like accuracy is defined in terms of how well the clock reproduces the ideal frequency of the physical process it's based on. Hopefully there's a physicist or two around who can give us the exciting details.

Censorship never slows the spread of word where a disease is concerned, it only adds rumor into the mix, to create confusion.

Sure it does. A prime example is the 1918 Influenza Pandemic and president Wilson's reaction to it.

Wilson and his administration saw news of the disease as promoting a public response that would hamper the war effort, and reporting it to be treason. So he had the government suppress the news and spread disinformation. Among the effects:

  - The disease had shown up in one military camp. The commanding officer wanted to quarantine the camp to keep it from spreading throughout the military and the country. But his orders were countermanded from above. Result: Sick and incubating soldiers were shipped all over the country, spreading the disease.

  - Disinformation about the nature of the disease, and how to treat it, was disseminated, using the Public Relations resources of the government, which drowned out more accurate statements from the medical community and others. This amounted to a set of government-created and broadly propagated health frauds, some of which persist today, causing those who believe them to waste money and impair their health. Among them is the theory of "autointoxication": that flu (or other disease) symptoms are the result of toxins produced by intestinal flora (if retained too long) and a resulting illusory need for "regularity" - having daily bowel movements at roughly the same time of day. To this day this theory results in laxative overuse and sometimes addiction, vitamin deficiencies, intestinal irritation, and delays in seeking medical attention when it is needed for a real illness.

So censorship CAN slow, or even suppress, the spread of word where a disease is concerned, bury the truth, and stop appropriate handling of a disease.

If you watch the video, you'll see that the CME happens well before the comet hits the sun.

If you watch the video, you can see that the CME happens before the comet hits, and actually vaporizes the comet on the way out.

Obviously the large corporate machinery at Facebook has caught and chewed up some very nice researcher, and the community once again comes in to right the wrong.

The problem is, by third parties paying him, it sets a precedent for rewarding Facebook's bad behavior. Make no mistake - the same idiots that refused the payout and who whitewashed it by claiming a ToS violation will be the same ones watching this effort and wondering how much more they can get away with.

Ultimately, this is bad business practice for Facebook because this strategy will devolve into grey hats and black hats going for the jugular every time, and less white hats trying to do the right thing. Or maybe this just means people will realize on their own what I keep telling them - avoid using Facebook wherever possible. That will, unfortunately, be found out the hard way during the next big publicized data breach.