And even this is ignoring that fact that we have no idea how get net energy from fusing He3. Fusing deuterium and tritium is orders of magnitude easier, and we are decades away from achieving even that. I don't think we really need to worry about a massive moon based industry mining something that is more or less useless. Someday the Sun will supernova. Maybe he should worry about that instead. It is a more immediate concern.

Catharsis is only one hypothesis for why video games reduce crime. A more plausible one is the "sucking up time" hypothesis. Every hour that kids spend playing games, is one less hour they are out on the street. When "Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas" was released, there was a noticeable drop in real world crime for several weeks. The most plausible explanation was that the potential criminals were at home playing.

America has immense amounts of frackable gas. Enough for more than a century at current consumption rates. Furthermore, we are rapidly developing technology to frack oil, which also releases gas. In the past, if this gas byproduct was not economical to collect, it was flared off. But flaring is now illegal in America, so the gas will be dumped onto the market even if it is below cost (the profit will come from the oil). For better or worse, gas will be cheap and plentiful for a long, long time.

But few of those ideas make it into products. I have heard MS Research described as "the graveyard of great ideas."

I am unaware of anyplace that this statement is true. Certainly nowhere in America. Where do you live?

From the examples in TFA, this "AI App" appears to do nothing more than some keyword matching. The obviously canned answers are about as simplistic as those from ELIZA, and usually just as irrelevant to the actual question.

Of course this is an idiotic justification. If the dealership network really offered benefits to the manufacturer, then there would be no need for laws that require them to use it.

There is plenty of evidence if you care to look. At the Planck level, reality is digital. Ergo, we are a simulation.

You can google for "Heritability of Intelligence" and find lots of studies and discussion. There is a good summary, with additional references, here: Correlations between IQ and degree of genetic relatedness.

Let's look at it logically. Does human consciousness have a naturalistic basis? If no, then there must be a "creator". If yes, then there is no reason that we should not be able to create artificial consciousnesses. Once we accomplish that, then the next step would be to simulate artificial worlds with societies of these artificial consciousnesses, to learn about how cultures emerge and evolve, or just for entertainment. In the millennia to come, we will probably conduct billions of these simulations. In every meaningful way, we will be gods to these artificial entities, whether they believe in us or not. So what is the chance that we are the sole top level reality? Pretty small. So logically, there is almost certainly something out there. Maybe Jehovah, Jesus and Allah are just three teenage nerds getting their universe ready for their school science fair, so they can beat that Zeus guy that won last year.

No it isn't. Vehicle platooning has been thoroughly tested both on test tracks and on public roads.

Very few scientists are in it for the money. Many would love $10M to invest in a lab or fund their Nobel dream research. Many scientists love their work. It is like the Iowa farmer who won five million in the lottery. A reporter asked him what he would do with the money. His answer was "I'll probably just keep farming till it is gone."

The graph was only the data for one study out of 53 that found a negative correlation between religiosity and IQ, and as a "country-to-country" comparison, it was not the most interesting. Better were the studies that looked at individuals, and found, on average, an almost 6 point gap between atheists and people that adhered to "dogmatic religious beliefs".

The standard deviation for IQ is about 15 points. Fraternal twins, even when raised apart, have a SD of about about six. Identical twins, even when raised apart, have a SD of about three. So your IQ is about 80% inherited. Of course it can be affected by other things, but overall, IQ is more strongly inherited than height. Height can certainly be affected by environmental factors like nutrition, but the overwhelming factor is the height of your parents.

Only up to a point. Natural selection works both ways. Stupid animals may die because they make stupid mistakes. But smart animals may also be under a disadvantage because their more active brain consumes more energy, and the curiosity that comes with intelligence may get them in trouble. If wild animals, such as rats, are captured, selectively bred to improve their intelligence, and then released, they will regress to their original level. So you want to be smart, but not too smart.