You download a few movies off the Internet and call yourself a pirate? Bah! You want to see real piracy - real attacks on the high see? Go talk to an Isreali commando.

Heck, it happens here in the USA. I'll name names too - Windstream Communications. As of a couple months ago they started redirecting our google search bars to their custom search portal. Annoyed the hell out me. Emailed, but apparently got dumped into the bucket of spam/"unhappy customer, please ignore".

I am not a chemist, but I'd wager its because this constitutes extrapolation. The periodic tables I just looked up online only go up to 103. Extrapolating > 10% off the end of your data set is a risky proposition, likely to produce incorrect results.

While I see your point, I find this refreshing. It is a nice change of pace to *not* see a study immediately claiming causation where it is possible that none exists. I've seen too many studies causing that X causes Y by applying treatment X to a group of subjects otherwise predisposed to Y, then claiming that the elevated proportion of subjects showing Y demonstrates that X causes Y.
And while this is a designed experiment, I think they are making the non-causal point because the brain is a complex and relatively poorly understood organ. We don't really even know all the variables, so we obviously can't control for them all. Causality is a likely explanation, but I don't know if we can say so with statistical significance.

NOT EUCLID AVENUE!

Technically, John Bell only disproved local hidden variables. Non-Local hidden variable theories, unpopular and/or unlikely though they may be, were not invalidated then.

Umm, the Chinese did not cut off the supply of Opium. They cut off the demand for opium. The British were illegally smuggling opium from India into China, then the Chinese enforced their laws, leading to war.

Maybe I'm missing something, but as someone who has working with the techniques referenced in the parent post - I'm not sure where the funny mod came from. Both clustering packet attributes and nonnegative matrix factorizations could be used for anomaly detection. And as someone who has also worked on CUDA a good bit, I think both of those problems have solutions that fit CUDA's concurrency model.

I get the impression that the mods saw big words and assumed this was a joke about buzzwords, but in fact that's a reasonable approach to this problem.

Anyone ever notice how many posts with quotes like "Go ahead, mod me down, but..." or "Hey, I've got karma to burn..." seem to get highly moderated?

Unlike the flying car, this one is actually completely feasible.

The flying car won't happen because of problems with physics. The vehicle has to produce sufficient upward thrust to lift the weight of a car + possibly 6 humans. And the amount of force needed will only go down if we develop lighter engines or better materials.

Simulating a brain is a purely computational problem. What's more, if we simulate at the cellular level as the article suggests, it's an embarrassingly parallel problem. This means that even if further iterations of Moore's Law keep us stuck at ~3-4GHz and only expand parallelism, it would still get the full benefit. This is one situation in which simply throwing more computational power at it will eventually succeed in producing results (no guarantee of positive results obviously, but results).

Maybe I'm missing something here. I've always wondered why there was a rush to block images of child abuse like this. As long as these sites are up, there is still a possibility for authorities to identify the guilty parties through the websites.

If every ISP blocks 100%, then not even cops can get an unfiltered connection. That means that they have stopped trying to catch the child pornographers, they just want to pretend they don't exist.

These are real children being abused. Their abusers are handing the police evidence. Why the rush to ignore it? Why not just monitor them? Keep track of who visits www.kiddieporn.com or whatever.