I mean, there is torsional resistance from the generator. It requires input power to maintain a constant velocity. I have a feeling the "perpetual motion machine" will return less output with a higher and higher power input due to increasing resistance of the generator.

If Eagleworks has conclusive data that the EmDrive does indeed work, then there should be a Manhattan Project level of funding pushed towards it. It would change everything.

>Do you believe rehabilitation is impossible or do you want revenge?

I don't believe that someone who commits mass murder can be rehabilitated, no. It isn't about revenge; it's about public safety.

Someone once pointed out that hoping a rapist gets raped in prison isn't a victory for his victim(s), because it somehow gives him what he had coming to him, but it's actually a victory for rape and violence. I wish I could remember who said that, because they are right. The score doesn't go Rapist: 1 World: 1. It goes Rape: 2.

What this man did is unspeakable, and he absolutely deserves to spend the rest of his life in prison. If he needs to be kept away from other prisoners as a safety issue, there are ways to do that without keeping him in solitary confinement, which has been shown conclusively to be profoundly cruel and harmful.

Putting him in solitary confinement, as a punitive measure, is not a victory for the good people in the world. It's a victory for inhumane treatment of human beings. This ruling is, in my opinion, very good and very strong for human rights, *precisely* because it was brought by such a despicable and horrible person. It affirms that all of us have basic human rights, even the absolute worst of us on this planet.

This is precisely why I lost all interest in Oculus the instant I heard that it had been acquired by Facebook.

I think the main point of the GP is that the end consumer has no means to test exactly what they are buying. Whether or not the real ingredients do anything, is at best, subject. Whether or not the product contains what the label says, is not subjective.

...but being a raging alcoholic is just dandy. They don't test for that.

Think of the scene in the matrix where operators are guiding ships in and out of Zion. There is a huge 3D interface for them to interact with.

You could eventually get right of ALL external displays. All of them. No longer would you need a tv in every room, or at all. The TV could be as big or as small as you want, any where you want.

You would no longer have to produce any external interfaces at all. Everything would be virtual, seamlessly integrated into your current environment, anywhere you are.

Imagine playing a shooting game where the enemy is seamlessly integrated into your house.

The possible applications for AR are truly astounding.

I don't really think you can beat C#. There is a freely available IDE. It creates applications for Windows (large install base). It is an object oriented language. The syntax is straightforward (you don't have to deal with complex point nomenclature, unless you want to for speed). Its a modern language that is as simple or complex as you want.

So according to this website, the device tax will bring in $29 Billion over the next 10 years.

So are they going to pass another tax to offset that missing revenue? Probably not. Any calls for repealing any revenue generating aspect of the ACA must be offset with revenue from somewhere else. As crappy as the ACA may or may not be, it is one of the few programs passed by Congress that have built in funding mechanisms.

That is why the ACA will work to some degree. But its still benefiting a particular industry (insurance) by allowing them to take 10% off the top of all healthcare spending. They have to be eliminated at some point.

While I watch plenty of content from Amazon Prime, Netflix and HBOgo, the lack of an officially supported USB port to play media single handedly caused me to buy a Roku 3, instead of a Fire TV.

Orbital is using the Russian engines for one reason and one reason only, they are procuring them at dirt cheap prices from some oligarch in Russia. That's it.

They can say how innovative they are, and how superior their design is, etc. But its all window dressing.

They build a business model based on procuring unknown hardware off the back of a shady box truck.

Teach the controversy! Right?

At some point, certain ideas simply need to be put to rest. Flat earthers, people who think storks deliver babies, you name it.

Creationists, by their own admission, will never change their hypothesis due to contradictory evidence. How can you have a debate?

Scientists aren't picking sides. That is the whole point. You develop a theory for how things happen based on collected evidence and derivations. If your hypothesis doesn't fit the data, it isn't valid.

It doesn't matter how much contrary evidence you provide against creationists. By their own definitions, they can never be falsified. How do you debate that?