In formal logic false=>x for every x, so if you start a phrase taking the singularity theory as true, that phrase has zero meaning.

From my point of view the actual country is England, all the other are colonies including the Falklands islands.

England is officially a police state now.

Ops I was downvoted by the shills. The moderation system is worthless.

You are right, and the comments are totally deluded or outright shills, molten salt reactors are unproven and if your goal is to see reductions in carbon emissions is extremely stupid to have more hope in those kind of nuclear reactors than in proven removable energy sources that have been improving their efficiency for decades now and are close to the point where they're economically superior to fossils.

Yes so what, he didn't said he is advocating replacing nuclear with coal. So many straw man arguments in slashdot is sad.

And who cares? Those people are 70 years old or more now, and old people always think things have gotten worse. New technology replaces old technology, and the space industry is still improving. We no longer make silly symbolic flights to the moon but the really important stuff, satellite technology, is ages ahead. Better energy productions methods are appearing. Nuclear is no longer the promise of the future. Now go back to bed granpa.

Is news for nerds not news for pedantics. Using MW is fine.

I'm sorry discussions about semantics are very boring to me, but I don't know why are you so fixated in numbers, CS is about processing (or computing of) information. The way you put that in the other posts seemed to me like referring to computer architecture, witch is part, but not the same, of computer science.

To most computer scientist the implementation details of the computer hardware are of no concern. How to move, store, and process numbers is pretty much outside of computer science and part of electronic engineering. Most CS papers deal with algorithms that are hardware and language independent.

It's more like equating the study required for building a car with the study required of an automotive engineer... It's not the same, but it's not so different either. I don't thing any real CS scientist can work without knowing hot to program.

Absurd, you don't give a 20 minute talk about a field and start discussing paradigms that aren't likely to change for the next 50 years.

Please those are implementation details. Algorithms (programming) is a core CS topic. Robotics on the other hand isn't, it's interdisciplinary.

Maybe because the rest of the world has common sense and they DO care about what they eat?

"The Japan situation shows that nuclear power is safe" That's where I stopped reading.