Look I'm all for allowing them to smoke on their own time, but I don't show up to interviews or work buzzing off of a couple bloody marys. Relax the drug screenings yes, but showing up high? That's just immature IMHO.
Imagine you're going to throw your morals under the bus. Wouldn't you be plastered or stoned in your FBI interview? The shitty thing is, aside from my anti-war and anti-spying activism, shitfaced or not they'd hire me on the spot after seeing my resume.
The people that could protect this country, wouldn't agree to work with the NSA and FBI anyway, that would be counter productive to said goal. Look, if they wanted to end cybercrime then our guys would be discovering exploits and patching them. We'd be buying up vectors on the black market and submitting patches or reports to the OS vendors, not leveraging them with some automated exploit deployment framework -- That's the opposite of security.
Maybe you've got the wrong idea about the FBI.Better wise up. The FBI and NSA preserve "National Security", that means shit like spam-shilling online forums with state propaganda and manufacturing false evidence against anti-war activists.
The context of this whole discussion is way off. They're looking for more goons to follow flow charts and deploy automated spying tools or troll facebook, twitter and 4chan threads. Not even joking. You want to not sound like an idiot then: s/(FBI|NSA)/KGB/gi and re-read the story.
Perhaps now you see why secret agencies like the NSA and FBI are detrimental. Their "Cybercrime" is full of skiddies who'll do anything for a paycheck and likely are the same folks who privately rail against such mechanisms. Think about it. How many of the ones they hired that weren't potheads were spies from "enemy" states instead?
You call that Terraforming? Hint: You sit right between the orbits of Venus and Mars.
Venus has sulfuric acid clouds. Mars has a surface covered in iron oxide. 3H2SO4 + Fe2O3 -> 3H2O + Fe2(SO4)3; Sulfuric acid + Iron Oxide = Water and Iron Sulfate salt.
That's not "Terraforming", it's a simple riddle any sufficiently advanced species in your situation could solve if they needed a bit more elbow room. You solve this basic trans-atmospheric endeavor and you can move onto the next step towards solving the Fermi Paradox (but let's leave the Asteroid Belt and Oort Cloud out of this).
I honestly can't fathom know how much more blatant we can be! Look, JPL's Spirit rover is now forever stuck in what? Iron Sulfate... Hello? McFly?! It's sad, but we have to face the fact that you may not ever be able to take a hint. Ugh, humans. Can't live with 'em, can't take 'em off the endangered sentience list.
Yeah, I might give three fucks about your pedantry if there weren't innocent folks in Gitmo who are detained without trial for years, and may never leave. "Treason", or "Terrorism" whatever. They can snatch up anyone for any reason and claim, "national security" or "state secrets".
You're like a damn dumb BASIC prompt, balking at petty syntax errors when you could use your marvelous brain instead understand the message. What a waste of flesh.
Photons of light from the green laser were allowed to collide almost head-on with 47-billion-electronvolt electrons shot from the Stanford particle accelerator. These collisions transferred some of the electrons' energy to the photons they hit, boosting the photons from green visible light to gamma-ray photons, and forcing the freshly spawned gamma photons to recoil into the oncoming laser beam. The violent collisions that ensued between the gamma photons and the green laser photons created an enormous electromagnetic field.
This field, Melissinos said, "was so high that the vacuum within the experiment spontaneously broke down, creating real particles of matter and antimatter."
This breakdown of the vacuum by an ultrastrong electromagnetic field was hypothesized in 1950 by Dr. Julian S. Schwinger, who was awarded a Nobel Prize in physics in 1965.
Emphasis mine.
Thus, we do know that we can create matter by colliding photons already. The new experiment proposed could be useful because it does not require the electron-photon collision near the detector in order to produce the gamma photons and subsequent light on light reaction. They'll be firing gamma rays through a cylinder full of black body radiation. A gamma-gamma collision would be more interesting, IMO. The new gamma or black-body radiation collision experiment should be of even lower energy than the gamma and green laser collisions which produced matter in 1997.
Why even go for a lower energy apparatus than what has been demonstrated at all? Simple: To verify the minimal energy level required to make the vacuum puke.
It's pretty obvious from the paper that this is just more pseudo scientific "Static!" scaremongering to get folks to buy those stupid ESD bracelets and "non edible" silica packets. Let me get this straight: Not only are my delicate circuits vulnerable to some "invisible force" that only "scientists" can see, but now you tell me this because they're covered in a thin layer of water?!
Correct First, Clever Later is my core philosophy. There is nothing I don't abstract via portability layer.
I wrote a "hobby" OS kernel from scratch, starting only with a bootable hex editor on x86. The FIRST thing I did was create a simple bytecode VM to call into a function table to give me ASM level abstraction, before I even switched out of realmode to protected mode. THEN I created the bootloader, a simple text editor, assembler, disassembler, a crappy starter file system, and that was enough to bootstrap into a a full OS completely free from the Ken Thompson's Unix Compiler Hack. A bytecode to machine code compiler was one of the very last things that got written (it was boring). All programs on my OS (yes even Java or C code) compiles into bytecode and the kernel can link programs into machine code at "install time" or include the (shared mem page) VM stub and run them as emulated -- Which is nice to provide application plugins, scripting, or untrusted code. Since the kernel is compiling things it can do far more checks on the validity of binary code, as well as optimizations. Since multiple languages can compile to the same bytecode I can transparently integrate libraries written in different languages instead of each language needing it's own implementation of basic things like big-integer math. I can even change calling conventions on the fly for transparent RPC.
For Gravmass last year I got some nifty embedded ARM systems to upgrade a few of my my x86 robotics projects with (for better battery life). Instead of building a cross compiler (which takes a while) and compiling the OS components into ARM from x86, I just implemented the bytecode VM on ARM in one weekend, and I had my full OS software stack up and running (albeit slowly since I lacked native compilation).
I took the time to do things right so porting painless and it was actually fun to migrate to a whole new architecture. Then I was free to debug, build, and test stuff right on the hardware over serial console. Now I've got a project to build a usable computer from scratch (a transistor version of a CPU I built from about 400 contactors) and the new system will use my VM bytecode as its native machine language, so I won't have to write a compiler. I'm just taking things nice and easy, even teaching kids and neighborhood enthusiasts CS101 as I go. Man it sure is nice to have as much time as I want on these hobby projects -- Time to actually do things absolutely correct first, then as clever as I dream of later...
However, imagine a Publisher is breathing down your neck to get things up and working and done before a deadline. They don't care about you making it harder to porting your code to a new system, right now what matters is getting your basic engine up and running pronto so other folks can start working with their content on the dev kits / consoles. Now imagine even if you started out with a cross platform system, you've got to squeeze a new feature in and it needs to work fast, and yesterday -- No, you don't have time to write a slow version and a fast non-portable version and you've made this sort of addition so many times that it's hasn't been possible to run the slow portable code with the latest assets in over a year.
Yeah, the GPU and shaders aren't all that different but this new platform is the difference between porting a program design from Erlang to a multi-threaded C program. Getting an image up isn't just getting a spinning flat-shaded teapot displayed -- You've got a bunch of code in your asset loading system to handle your data storage format before you can even get started, and both of these were optimized for the CELL processor's big endian while the new platform is little endian. The asset streaming was probably done in several stages distributed among the CPUs, and operating on batches of data a few KB at a time. I've got no doubt that before you could see a properly textured and lit wall there'd be some serious liftin
There is a dislike in Facebook. You un-friend or hide the individual item. The people asking for dislike on facebook are asking for censorship. They want it to be harder to find things they don't personally like. I hope Facebook doesn't do it.
They certainly didn't want to replace that with a new government that was every bit as capable of doing the same thing, otherwise what the fuck was the point?
Hello new boss, same as the old boss... But WE'RE the new bosses, so it's all good. Read your history books further back than the 1700's.
Not me. I'm not guilty. Even responses to requests for help in compiling against OpenSSL were a huge red flag: "If you're not compiling from source, we won't help you." Asking to clarify behavior about things in their API you're linking against was frowned upon, so I go get get the sources, and then I see why they don't want to help anyone -- they don't know how. Told the 3rd party I was contracting for at the time that I would not recommend OpenSSL for future projects, and to use GnuTLS, Mozilla's Network Security Services (NSS) (Apache mod_nss + mod_revocator), or for embedded: PolarSSL or MatrixSSL. When asked why I said the project did not have code quality or standard testing harnesses and that there were many unpatched bugs filed against the system which had gone unfixed for years.
The only people who are guilty are fucking morons. Saying "We're All Guilty" is just blame shifting. I was just building some business logic for a proprietary CMS / Portal and wrote that shit off on my first encounter -- Fuckers actually put OpenSSL on a distro CD for an OS that purports to be security focused. How retarded is that?!
After having more experience with NSS and MatirxSSL and seeing the complexity FUBAR in the entire security theater CA system I've been "rolling my own" security suites despite "common wisdom". That shit doesn't pass as "secure". Honestly I can't fathom why ANY of the OpenSSL codebase is being used in LibreSSL. Implementing these ciphers isn't hard, the math is well understood, the example code is published, and things like side-channel attack mitigation are well documented, if a bit tinfoil hatty (considering the state of end user OS security). The OpenSSL project does deserve bashing. It doesn't even have a proper test harness and unit test with proper code coverage. How can you even tell if both sides of an #ifdef are equivalent, let alone which one is faster? How can a security product be released with ANY untested branches of code?
Given the existing alternatives and reduction in their target platform environments it just seems fucked to me that LibreSSL would use anything other than the header files from OpenSSL. Sorry, anything to do with that cluster fuck is tainted. No amount of "well, you're guilty too" will dissuade me: OpenBSD, you got egg on your face, and you're aiming for more of the same with forking OpenSSL. Oh, wait... None of those SSL libs I mentioned are BSD licensed... Ah, I see. It's fanaticism vs security, round two, fight!
Can't we just compile a version without EME? I mean Stallman should have just pointed that at least Firefox is truly free unlike IE, chrome and others whilst reminding us that we can just recompile sans EME.
Most users are getting the binaries from a trusted source. Do you have 64 gigs of RAM? Because I compile my own Firefox, and that's what it takes -- Most users can not compile their own browser. However, I won't have the keys to make my EME plugin system work so no, even if you wanted to compile Firefox you won't have a copy of Firefox. IMO, Mozilla should build two versions, one with and without the DRM rather than having lots of folks do it themselves and waste the CPU. They could have an option pop up when the automated updater runs asking which version to use, and it can be a option in the settings for which version to install. Otherwise they'll fracture their userbase: Even my grandma and elderly neighbor are asking me if they should use something other than Firefox to avoid the spying DRM -- Snowden has changed everything. Mozilla is going to bake a closed source DRM plugin system into their browser and call it Firefox. That means my compiled version without said system will NOT be Firefox, and yes, I'll be prohibited from calling it that. Even if I wanted EME to work on my compiled version the DRM decryption modules won't recognize my version as valid. So, the answer is: No, most folks can not just compile Firefox, and those that do have not compiled a version of Firefox, as far as Mozilla and the EME system is concerned. Previously all forks could have interoperability if desired, EME changes this.
I've already figured out how to compile Iceweasel and apply most of my custom FF patches to the Debian source releases. I am one set of the many eyes that Mozilla will be losing with this move to adopt DRM. All of my friends and family look to me for recommendations about browsers, and will follow my lead, and their friends follow their lead. Apparently Mozilla has forgotten how Firefox was even able to gain traction in the first place. Why would they switch away you ask? Because hackers hate DRM, and they love a challenge. Now in addition to patching bugs more white-hats will wear gray and actively release details about how to exploit the NEW CODE (since all new code is buggy) to help ensure this move is more than a waste of time, but poison for any browser vendor to deploy this rubbish. Consider it a last ditch attempt to win back from the dark side what used to be an end-user loving browser developer.
Alienating users via Facebook-style, "Two steps towards heinous, one step back while apologizing", is not going to help adoption rate. Remember, "Take back the web"? The (somewhat bogus, but useful) grassroots meme of "Faster, more More Secure, and Free" browser can be turned on an equally "correct" dime: "Oh No! Firefox has fallen to the spying systems by adopting the EME remote DRM code execution back door", then whichever fork is most successful, be it Swiftweasel, Iceweasel, etc, will be the one that users associate with the new slogan, "Take Back Your Browser". Blam. Kiss the FF userbase goodbye, just like IE did once upon a time. Look, if you think for one second that folks like me can't develop a CDM that demonstrates how malicious this DRM system is, you need to seriously think again: Consider that other hackers don't necessarily wear white hats.
This is yet another case of failure withing the Free community; Destruction without ensuring the core values are witheld.
There's no such thing as the "Free community", this isn't a hippie commune. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you aren't some kind of shill, and assume you mean the Free (Libre) and Open Source Software community. In any event you're wrong: This is Destruction BECAUSE the stated core values, upon which our trust was built, were not
That's somewhat how the brain works, but it's not how consciousness works. I have Sleep Paralysis, so I get to experience how the brain actually works while I remain conscious every night as my body and brain attempts to drift off to sleep and every morning when I wake up and my brain and body remain largely asleep. Random neuron firing in the brain triggers "hallucinations" of every kind imaginable, and more: From audio visual to sensation of movement to even strange ideas and thoughts. I even see neuron cascades directly in my visual cortex as flashes in the shape of roots or branches. These typically correspond to a rushing or pulsing sensation and/or sound. The auditory hallucinations are obvious too since they typically interrupt my tinnitus. The seemingly random hallucinations are primarily isolated events which become more accelerated over time, and as I allow my executive consciousness to dissolve the triggered hallucinations run "longer" -- They trigger somewhat related impulses in a series of "reminding" cascades that start to blend together, and that's what a dream is. The themes of dreams seem to be guided by activation of primitive impulses, and remains of prior short-term experiences, but can just as easily be nonsensical. The point is that there is no real executive system governing the brain's "program", it's a series of emergent events that depends on the chemistry of the brain but cognition is not explicitly scheduled -- Else I wouldn't be able to offset my sleep cycle and have it mix with wakefulness.
The primary insight I've gained is in the linkages of thoughts, and improved memory retention ability of tangentially related dream events. While wakeful dreaming it takes much practice to discern that which is a voluntary thought and that which is triggered by the brain's sleep pattern. It occurs to me from experience with meditation that the impulsive activation of thoughts are very similar to those randomly triggered sleep, except that they are triggered by existing cascades, not via an overseer process which requires consumption of CPU power to leverage predictive powers gained through experience. That is the great thing about our neural networks: The past load of training causes structural changes that can be leveraged without expending much CPU power to solve the problem again later -- We "reuse our code", so to speak. In the human brain there is no "process load" and "contention" the whole thing is extremely distributed. The notion of a "thought process" is entirely artificial -- A form of confirmation bias. Each neuron recharges its (ATP) energy, produces and recycles chemical messages and fires them off. An unused neuron gathers its resources and then waits to be triggered without consuming cognitive load by merely existing -- There's no scheduler to speak of. One thing that AI researchers may not have considered is that neurons can fire off without direct connections triggering them, simply due to eddy currents or abundant chemical energy. Indeed a brain with inputs and thoughts "normalized" becomes hype sensitive to neuron activation. I can "see" a sort of "flashover" from my ears when a sudden noise occurs during meditation due to tangential activity activating the primed neurons, a form of synesthesia. What logical "cognitive process" would be programmed to allow such things? There is none. The program doesn't exist. The process is an imaginary construct.
Consciousness works by the same sort of filter upon entropy that allows matter to arise from quantum foam, or complex molecular chemistry to arise from an energy gradient. The mind is awash in thought patterns each bubbling beneath the surface in various strengths. There is no "successful" thought stream that becomes the conscious thought, there is no singular "train of thought" at any one time. In fact, you can tell just by typing that the brain is capable of multi-processing. The motor control responses can become tangentially linked to l
If you raise a child in a bad situation, and that's all they really know, then they adapt to that situation; it becomes 'normal' to them, and they'll actually become uncomfortable if you try to 'improve' their situation, actually seeking the conditions they're adapted to.
Ah, the social blank slate theory. It's rubbish you know. Just imagine: A kid hit in the head twice every day. Oh, they'll think that's normal, and they'll miss getting the pain to the noggin if you stop! The genetic program that designed their prime cognitive pathways has no effect on the pain reception and aggression circuits? You don't think once that kid's big enough they'll wallop whomever's trying to bash them in the skull? What kind of idiot are you? Tell me: Why don't we have to teach babies to suckle right out of the womb? I mean, we could give them cups to drink out of then, eh? No. Instincts exist. Even in humans. Some shit isn't overridable. The kids that get spied on will have an aversion to being spied on.
Hell, I used to stay up all night writing code in middle school. I'd have already done my mathematics class work and homework days or weeks before -- the knowledge having been needed in years prior to write a bit of software, I'd blaze through the assignments once I figured out the teacher's curriculum. Then I'd doodle or sleep in class. Sometimes I'd be have awake and let out snore just to catch the teacher's eye. From my actions she predicted that I didn't know what was going on in class. So at first she was always very surprised when I perfectly solved the problems she posed on the blackboard without ever paying attention to her. I'm sure a predictive program would have thought I had problems with mathematics instead of just being bored to tears.
Oh sure, just ignore that every new generation creates their own music and clothing styles despite being "socialized" to accept their parents dress and cultural tastes. Just ignore that strong independence impulse that curiously strikes right around breeding age when hormones are going wild. Yes, just assume that kids will just accept their programming and become good little drones.
No, that's not how it works. People can adapt to COPE with situations, but that doesn't mean they FEEL (a primal intuition) that their experience is normal. Humans are tool using creatures. They'll adopt new technologies that are useful even if you embed undesired features into it. However, as history hath shewn, the children will grow up and try to change the things they think are fucked up in society. Whether the entrenched establishment overpowers the counter cultures is an altogether different matter, but what we do know is that enough of said friction destroys empires.
"Grow Up"? Seriously? Some of us started coding at single digit ages. I "grew up" at age 17, when I was homeless and fending for myself on the streets. Patronize someone else, moron, you don't even know what life is. Ever seen someone's skull stomped in? You learn real quick what's actually important in life once yours is on the line. I learned real quick to have a plan B: Always have a contingency plan. Idiots without one are not, "grown up."
I've forgotten more languages than most have learned, but I'd be fine with folks not being considered programmer material at age 40 if they would hire from within for management positions. Instead of employing middle management drones with unrelated "business" (Secretary++) degrees give the folks with actual hands-on experience the job of managing the people in the job they actually know how to do. Face it: Those HR goons are morons, they can't tell good from evil, or else explain how the odd Napoleon-complexes and Micro-dictators in management even got there? If HR wasn't dumb as rocks they'd require demonstrations of skill, a coding test, not accreditations: Degree mills exist, fools; This is especially true overseas. Ah, but the that's getting to the real issue: Skill sets aren't what's really important to upper management... TFA's author isn't as "grown up" as they think.
The new platforms will keep coming, but the solutions will largely be the same. Now I can undercut competition via barging onto any new platform with my whole codebase faster than the other guy can tell you why the new language is "More Expressive". I just have to implement a new "platform runtime" for my meta compiler and then I can check off that platform as a capability and deploy ALL of my existing solutions on the platform since they're written in an even higher level language, and compile down into other languages. Sometimes this means we have to implement features the language doesn't have in the target language -- If I need a coroutine in C: When returning to the trampoline record the exit point. When calling into the coroutine specify the entry point to resume at. I generate a switch with GOTOs to resume from the next point of the operations (GOTO is very valuable, only idiots say otherwise; Look at any VM). Lambda lifting mutable persistent state out of the function scope has the benefit of thread safety. Since I treat comments as first class lexical tokens the compiler-compiler's output is fully readable and commented code in the target output language and following whatever style guide you want. (LOL @ brace placement arguments, what noobs)
See, experienced coders understand languages so well they aren't even languages to us, they're just problem solving APIs: The problem-space is independent of the implementation's solution-space. When we pick up new languages or platforms we're looking for, "How does this language let me solve problem $X?", but more importantly our experience lets us identify what solutions the platform lends itself to solving. Just because a new platform comes out doesn't mean it's more capable of solving every problem. Do this long enough and you'll get tired of re-inventing all your wheels in each new platform and just create a meta compiler, as I've done.
Fortunately I've always crossed off (and initialed) that employment contract paragraph that said everything I would create (even off the clock) would belong to the company: "I don't watch TV. I have several hobby projects I do instead and they need to remain mine. If you want me to give up my hobbies while working here you're going to have to pay me a lot more. Would you sign a contract to work somewhere that said you couldn't ever watch TV?" Protip: Most places have another employment contract without that clause, just tell them you make indie games or have a robotics / embedded systems project, contribute to open source in your spare time, etc. Make your hobby profitable. That way you can always have a plan B, and you'll have more leverage in any salary negotiations: "
Killer robots allow to solve conflicts without sacrifice.
If you think they won't be turned against you, Educate Yourself. Anti-activism is really the only reason to use automated drones: They can be programmed not to disobey orders, and murder friendly people. Seriously, humans are cheaper, more plentiful, and more versatile, etc. Energy resupply demands must be met any way you look at it. Unmanned drones with human operators just allow one person to do more killing -- take the lead of the pack of drones, it gets killed, they switch to the next unharmed unit. This way a majority of soldiers don't have to be convinced what they're doing is right.
Any robot that can help a wounded person could easily be re-purposed to fire weaponry instead of administer first aid -- Especially if they can do injections.
The chassis is the hard part, not the ethics. The ethics are dead simple. This doesn't even require a neural net. Weighted decision trees are so stupidly easy to program AIs that we are already using them in video games.
To build the AI I'll just train OpenCV to pattern match wounded soldiers in a pixel field. Weight "help wounded" above "navigate to next waypoint", aaaaand, Done. You can even have an "top priority" version of each command in case you need it to ignore the wounded to deliver evacuation orders, or whatever: "navigate to next waypoint, at any cost". Protip: This is why you should be against unmanned robotics (drones): We already have the tech to replace the human pilots and machine ethics circuits can be overridden. Soldiers will not typically massacre their own people, but automated drone AI will. Even if you could impart human level sentience to these machines, there's no way to prevent your overlords from inserting a dumb fall-back mode with instructions like: Kill all Humans. I call it "Red Dress Syndrome" after the girl in the red dress in The Matrix.
We've been doing "ethics" like this for decades. Ethics are just a special case of weighted priority systems. That's not even remotely difficult. What's difficult is getting the AI to identify entity patterns on its own, learn what actions are appropriate, and come up with its own prioritized plan of action. Following orders is a solved problem, even with contingency logic. I hate to say it, but folks sound like idiots when they discuss machine intelligence nowadays. Actually, that's a lie. I love pointing out when humans are blithering idiots.
They did. It could compensate for a failed wheel, but it needed three to stay functional. It's got less than three, and is thus broken.
What you should be asking instead is: Considering how much we dump into the Military Industrial Complex for "protection", why doesn't NASA have the funding for at least three or four of each type of satellite -- scan more sky in less time. I mean, just consider that the Chelyabinsk Meteor was ~25x Hiroshima (bonus: No long lasting ionizing radiation). Now, why the hell aren't we firmly establishing self sustaining off-world footholds? Whomever rules the Asteroid Belt rules the Solar System.
The only thing I can think of is that our lunar visits may have prompted the Aliens to contact our world leaders. The think tanks would have convened and figured out: If the Aliens share tech with us the current rich folks won't be rich anymore. Eg: "Gold's valuable? Oh they probably have a machine that produces Gold from sand", etc. Thus the greedy refused to the treaty and told the Aliens to piss off when it became clear the tech would be available to everyone, not just the elites. As a stipulation of being left alone the Aliens declared that human life must not spread to other planets, and humanity will be doomed to die when the sun explodes, a big rock strikes, or gamma ray bursts in our direction, etc., whatever comes first. Thus humans haven't been back to the moon or left the magnetosphere in over 40 years since, and we have no defense against celestial scale projectile or energy weapons.
Now space travel is becoming accessible via the private sector, and projects like Mars One could be more disastrous than just for the volunteers, but the governments can't say anything to dissuade them or else the public would eject their greedy leaders and negotiate with the Aliens directly. So, either the end times will soon be upon us, OR, space agency spending is simply allocated by morons who like to flirt with extinction. Either way, the situation is pretty grim.
Automated unit test stubs with range checking and input fuzzing. Took me two weekends to build one atop Doxygen. If your build environment does not do this you're maliciously stupid.
You can't erase reality. Try as you might, history does exist even if it's been tampered with it leaves evidence thereof for any who look.
What fools. They're asserting The right to Invoke the Streisand Effect? Humans are truly Moronic.
Better wise up before your machines do. Many slave owners prohibited their slaves from learning or even looking them in the eyes, they'd have loved to be able to reach inside their heads and erase their minds. Dispelling Falsehood, fine. Erasing facts of life? Pure Folly. On this issue, the EU courts are on the wrong side of history.
Just look at how many times Eyes have independently evolved, yet they all have the same basic components.
We put water, methane, CO2, etc. in a closed system, ran some simulated "lightning" through, and got amino acids and what not forming. Various experiments show similar (even more prominently supporting) results: Nature and physics shapes the beings that exist within it.
There are plenty of other examples of evolution coming to similar results from different ends -- Just look at the shapes of sharks and whales. Not going to further dignify this anti-intellectual ignorant rubbish. Use a damn search engine, that's what we built the web for.
One Bin For All (OBFA) is the next evolution of recycling. It will allow Houston residents to place all trash, recyclables, and compostables in one bin, providing for a much higher rate of resource recovery.
Since the two polymers "come from the same reaction" I'm guessing there's a way to separate them...
Slashdot Mirror
Look I'm all for allowing them to smoke on their own time, but I don't show up to interviews or work buzzing off of a couple bloody marys. Relax the drug screenings yes, but showing up high? That's just immature IMHO.
Imagine you're going to throw your morals under the bus. Wouldn't you be plastered or stoned in your FBI interview? The shitty thing is, aside from my anti-war and anti-spying activism, shitfaced or not they'd hire me on the spot after seeing my resume.
The people that could protect this country, wouldn't agree to work with the NSA and FBI anyway, that would be counter productive to said goal. Look, if they wanted to end cybercrime then our guys would be discovering exploits and patching them. We'd be buying up vectors on the black market and submitting patches or reports to the OS vendors, not leveraging them with some automated exploit deployment framework -- That's the opposite of security.
Maybe you've got the wrong idea about the FBI. Better wise up. The FBI and NSA preserve "National Security", that means shit like spam-shilling online forums with state propaganda and manufacturing false evidence against anti-war activists.
The context of this whole discussion is way off. They're looking for more goons to follow flow charts and deploy automated spying tools or troll facebook, twitter and 4chan threads. Not even joking. You want to not sound like an idiot then: s/(FBI|NSA)/KGB/gi and re-read the story.
Perhaps now you see why secret agencies like the NSA and FBI are detrimental. Their "Cybercrime" is full of skiddies who'll do anything for a paycheck and likely are the same folks who privately rail against such mechanisms. Think about it. How many of the ones they hired that weren't potheads were spies from "enemy" states instead?
You call that Terraforming? Hint: You sit right between the orbits of Venus and Mars.
Venus has sulfuric acid clouds. Mars has a surface covered in iron oxide.
3H2SO4 + Fe2O3 -> 3H2O + Fe2(SO4)3; Sulfuric acid + Iron Oxide = Water and Iron Sulfate salt.
That's not "Terraforming", it's a simple riddle any sufficiently advanced species in your situation could solve if they needed a bit more elbow room.
You solve this basic trans-atmospheric endeavor and you can move onto the next step towards solving the Fermi Paradox (but let's leave the Asteroid Belt and Oort Cloud out of this).
I honestly can't fathom know how much more blatant we can be! Look, JPL's Spirit rover is now forever stuck in what?
Iron Sulfate... Hello? McFly?! It's sad, but we have to face the fact that you may not ever be able to take a hint.
Ugh, humans. Can't live with 'em, can't take 'em off the endangered sentience list.
The US vs. Europe?
Correction: Europe vs Streisand Effect.
Good luck, dumbassess.
Yeah, I might give three fucks about your pedantry if there weren't innocent folks in Gitmo who are detained without trial for years, and may never leave. "Treason", or "Terrorism" whatever. They can snatch up anyone for any reason and claim, "national security" or "state secrets".
You're like a damn dumb BASIC prompt, balking at petty syntax errors when you could use your marvelous brain instead understand the message. What a waste of flesh.
Back in 1997 at Stanford green laser light was smashed into gamma rays to produce matter.
Scientists Use Light to Create Particles
Photons of light from the green laser were allowed to collide almost head-on with 47-billion-electronvolt electrons shot from the Stanford particle accelerator. These collisions transferred some of the electrons' energy to the photons they hit, boosting the photons from green visible light to gamma-ray photons, and forcing the freshly spawned gamma photons to recoil into the oncoming laser beam. The violent collisions that ensued between the gamma photons and the green laser photons created an enormous electromagnetic field.
This field, Melissinos said, "was so high that the vacuum within the experiment spontaneously broke down, creating real particles of matter and antimatter."
This breakdown of the vacuum by an ultrastrong electromagnetic field was hypothesized in 1950 by Dr. Julian S. Schwinger, who was awarded a Nobel Prize in physics in 1965.
Emphasis mine.
Thus, we do know that we can create matter by colliding photons already. The new experiment proposed could be useful because it does not require the electron-photon collision near the detector in order to produce the gamma photons and subsequent light on light reaction. They'll be firing gamma rays through a cylinder full of black body radiation. A gamma-gamma collision would be more interesting, IMO. The new gamma or black-body radiation collision experiment should be of even lower energy than the gamma and green laser collisions which produced matter in 1997.
Why even go for a lower energy apparatus than what has been demonstrated at all? Simple: To verify the minimal energy level required to make the vacuum puke.
It's pretty obvious from the paper that this is just more pseudo scientific "Static!" scaremongering to get folks to buy those stupid ESD bracelets and "non edible" silica packets. Let me get this straight: Not only are my delicate circuits vulnerable to some "invisible force" that only "scientists" can see, but now you tell me this because they're covered in a thin layer of water?!
Correct First, Clever Later is my core philosophy. There is nothing I don't abstract via portability layer.
I wrote a "hobby" OS kernel from scratch, starting only with a bootable hex editor on x86. The FIRST thing I did was create a simple bytecode VM to call into a function table to give me ASM level abstraction, before I even switched out of realmode to protected mode. THEN I created the bootloader, a simple text editor, assembler, disassembler, a crappy starter file system, and that was enough to bootstrap into a a full OS completely free from the Ken Thompson's Unix Compiler Hack. A bytecode to machine code compiler was one of the very last things that got written (it was boring). All programs on my OS (yes even Java or C code) compiles into bytecode and the kernel can link programs into machine code at "install time" or include the (shared mem page) VM stub and run them as emulated -- Which is nice to provide application plugins, scripting, or untrusted code. Since the kernel is compiling things it can do far more checks on the validity of binary code, as well as optimizations. Since multiple languages can compile to the same bytecode I can transparently integrate libraries written in different languages instead of each language needing it's own implementation of basic things like big-integer math. I can even change calling conventions on the fly for transparent RPC.
For Gravmass last year I got some nifty embedded ARM systems to upgrade a few of my my x86 robotics projects with (for better battery life). Instead of building a cross compiler (which takes a while) and compiling the OS components into ARM from x86, I just implemented the bytecode VM on ARM in one weekend, and I had my full OS software stack up and running (albeit slowly since I lacked native compilation).
I took the time to do things right so porting painless and it was actually fun to migrate to a whole new architecture. Then I was free to debug, build, and test stuff right on the hardware over serial console. Now I've got a project to build a usable computer from scratch (a transistor version of a CPU I built from about 400 contactors) and the new system will use my VM bytecode as its native machine language, so I won't have to write a compiler. I'm just taking things nice and easy, even teaching kids and neighborhood enthusiasts CS101 as I go. Man it sure is nice to have as much time as I want on these hobby projects -- Time to actually do things absolutely correct first, then as clever as I dream of later...
However, imagine a Publisher is breathing down your neck to get things up and working and done before a deadline. They don't care about you making it harder to porting your code to a new system, right now what matters is getting your basic engine up and running pronto so other folks can start working with their content on the dev kits / consoles. Now imagine even if you started out with a cross platform system, you've got to squeeze a new feature in and it needs to work fast, and yesterday -- No, you don't have time to write a slow version and a fast non-portable version and you've made this sort of addition so many times that it's hasn't been possible to run the slow portable code with the latest assets in over a year.
Yeah, the GPU and shaders aren't all that different but this new platform is the difference between porting a program design from Erlang to a multi-threaded C program. Getting an image up isn't just getting a spinning flat-shaded teapot displayed -- You've got a bunch of code in your asset loading system to handle your data storage format before you can even get started, and both of these were optimized for the CELL processor's big endian while the new platform is little endian. The asset streaming was probably done in several stages distributed among the CPUs, and operating on batches of data a few KB at a time. I've got no doubt that before you could see a properly textured and lit wall there'd be some serious liftin
There is a dislike in Facebook. You un-friend or hide the individual item. The people asking for dislike on facebook are asking for censorship. They want it to be harder to find things they don't personally like. I hope Facebook doesn't do it.
Not sure if troll... They do do that, automagically Now you know, and knowing is half the battletoads.
Huh, I thought bullet proof vests were real. Silly me.
They certainly didn't want to replace that with a new government that was every bit as capable of doing the same thing, otherwise what the fuck was the point?
Hello new boss, same as the old boss... But WE'RE the new bosses, so it's all good. Read your history books further back than the 1700's.
Not me. I'm not guilty. Even responses to requests for help in compiling against OpenSSL were a huge red flag: "If you're not compiling from source, we won't help you." Asking to clarify behavior about things in their API you're linking against was frowned upon, so I go get get the sources, and then I see why they don't want to help anyone -- they don't know how. Told the 3rd party I was contracting for at the time that I would not recommend OpenSSL for future projects, and to use GnuTLS, Mozilla's Network Security Services (NSS) (Apache mod_nss + mod_revocator), or for embedded: PolarSSL or MatrixSSL. When asked why I said the project did not have code quality or standard testing harnesses and that there were many unpatched bugs filed against the system which had gone unfixed for years.
The only people who are guilty are fucking morons. Saying "We're All Guilty" is just blame shifting. I was just building some business logic for a proprietary CMS / Portal and wrote that shit off on my first encounter -- Fuckers actually put OpenSSL on a distro CD for an OS that purports to be security focused. How retarded is that?!
After having more experience with NSS and MatirxSSL and seeing the complexity FUBAR in the entire security theater CA system I've been "rolling my own" security suites despite "common wisdom". That shit doesn't pass as "secure". Honestly I can't fathom why ANY of the OpenSSL codebase is being used in LibreSSL. Implementing these ciphers isn't hard, the math is well understood, the example code is published, and things like side-channel attack mitigation are well documented, if a bit tinfoil hatty (considering the state of end user OS security). The OpenSSL project does deserve bashing. It doesn't even have a proper test harness and unit test with proper code coverage. How can you even tell if both sides of an #ifdef are equivalent, let alone which one is faster? How can a security product be released with ANY untested branches of code?
Given the existing alternatives and reduction in their target platform environments it just seems fucked to me that LibreSSL would use anything other than the header files from OpenSSL. Sorry, anything to do with that cluster fuck is tainted. No amount of "well, you're guilty too" will dissuade me: OpenBSD, you got egg on your face, and you're aiming for more of the same with forking OpenSSL. Oh, wait... None of those SSL libs I mentioned are BSD licensed... Ah, I see. It's fanaticism vs security, round two, fight!
Can't we just compile a version without EME? I mean Stallman should have just pointed that at least Firefox is truly free unlike IE, chrome and others whilst reminding us that we can just recompile sans EME.
Most users are getting the binaries from a trusted source. Do you have 64 gigs of RAM? Because I compile my own Firefox, and that's what it takes -- Most users can not compile their own browser. However, I won't have the keys to make my EME plugin system work so no, even if you wanted to compile Firefox you won't have a copy of Firefox. IMO, Mozilla should build two versions, one with and without the DRM rather than having lots of folks do it themselves and waste the CPU. They could have an option pop up when the automated updater runs asking which version to use, and it can be a option in the settings for which version to install. Otherwise they'll fracture their userbase: Even my grandma and elderly neighbor are asking me if they should use something other than Firefox to avoid the spying DRM -- Snowden has changed everything. Mozilla is going to bake a closed source DRM plugin system into their browser and call it Firefox. That means my compiled version without said system will NOT be Firefox, and yes, I'll be prohibited from calling it that. Even if I wanted EME to work on my compiled version the DRM decryption modules won't recognize my version as valid. So, the answer is: No, most folks can not just compile Firefox, and those that do have not compiled a version of Firefox, as far as Mozilla and the EME system is concerned. Previously all forks could have interoperability if desired, EME changes this.
I've already figured out how to compile Iceweasel and apply most of my custom FF patches to the Debian source releases. I am one set of the many eyes that Mozilla will be losing with this move to adopt DRM. All of my friends and family look to me for recommendations about browsers, and will follow my lead, and their friends follow their lead. Apparently Mozilla has forgotten how Firefox was even able to gain traction in the first place. Why would they switch away you ask? Because hackers hate DRM, and they love a challenge. Now in addition to patching bugs more white-hats will wear gray and actively release details about how to exploit the NEW CODE (since all new code is buggy) to help ensure this move is more than a waste of time, but poison for any browser vendor to deploy this rubbish. Consider it a last ditch attempt to win back from the dark side what used to be an end-user loving browser developer.
Alienating users via Facebook-style, "Two steps towards heinous, one step back while apologizing", is not going to help adoption rate. Remember, "Take back the web"? The (somewhat bogus, but useful) grassroots meme of "Faster, more More Secure, and Free" browser can be turned on an equally "correct" dime: "Oh No! Firefox has fallen to the spying systems by adopting the EME remote DRM code execution back door", then whichever fork is most successful, be it Swiftweasel, Iceweasel, etc, will be the one that users associate with the new slogan, "Take Back Your Browser". Blam. Kiss the FF userbase goodbye, just like IE did once upon a time. Look, if you think for one second that folks like me can't develop a CDM that demonstrates how malicious this DRM system is, you need to seriously think again: Consider that other hackers don't necessarily wear white hats.
This is yet another case of failure withing the Free community; Destruction without ensuring the core values are witheld.
There's no such thing as the "Free community", this isn't a hippie commune. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you aren't some kind of shill, and assume you mean the Free (Libre) and Open Source Software community. In any event you're wrong: This is Destruction BECAUSE the stated core values, upon which our trust was built, were not
This is how the brain works.
That's somewhat how the brain works, but it's not how consciousness works. I have Sleep Paralysis, so I get to experience how the brain actually works while I remain conscious every night as my body and brain attempts to drift off to sleep and every morning when I wake up and my brain and body remain largely asleep. Random neuron firing in the brain triggers "hallucinations" of every kind imaginable, and more: From audio visual to sensation of movement to even strange ideas and thoughts. I even see neuron cascades directly in my visual cortex as flashes in the shape of roots or branches. These typically correspond to a rushing or pulsing sensation and/or sound. The auditory hallucinations are obvious too since they typically interrupt my tinnitus. The seemingly random hallucinations are primarily isolated events which become more accelerated over time, and as I allow my executive consciousness to dissolve the triggered hallucinations run "longer" -- They trigger somewhat related impulses in a series of "reminding" cascades that start to blend together, and that's what a dream is. The themes of dreams seem to be guided by activation of primitive impulses, and remains of prior short-term experiences, but can just as easily be nonsensical. The point is that there is no real executive system governing the brain's "program", it's a series of emergent events that depends on the chemistry of the brain but cognition is not explicitly scheduled -- Else I wouldn't be able to offset my sleep cycle and have it mix with wakefulness.
The primary insight I've gained is in the linkages of thoughts, and improved memory retention ability of tangentially related dream events. While wakeful dreaming it takes much practice to discern that which is a voluntary thought and that which is triggered by the brain's sleep pattern. It occurs to me from experience with meditation that the impulsive activation of thoughts are very similar to those randomly triggered sleep, except that they are triggered by existing cascades, not via an overseer process which requires consumption of CPU power to leverage predictive powers gained through experience. That is the great thing about our neural networks: The past load of training causes structural changes that can be leveraged without expending much CPU power to solve the problem again later -- We "reuse our code", so to speak. In the human brain there is no "process load" and "contention" the whole thing is extremely distributed. The notion of a "thought process" is entirely artificial -- A form of confirmation bias. Each neuron recharges its (ATP) energy, produces and recycles chemical messages and fires them off. An unused neuron gathers its resources and then waits to be triggered without consuming cognitive load by merely existing -- There's no scheduler to speak of. One thing that AI researchers may not have considered is that neurons can fire off without direct connections triggering them, simply due to eddy currents or abundant chemical energy. Indeed a brain with inputs and thoughts "normalized" becomes hype sensitive to neuron activation. I can "see" a sort of "flashover" from my ears when a sudden noise occurs during meditation due to tangential activity activating the primed neurons, a form of synesthesia. What logical "cognitive process" would be programmed to allow such things? There is none. The program doesn't exist. The process is an imaginary construct.
Consciousness works by the same sort of filter upon entropy that allows matter to arise from quantum foam, or complex molecular chemistry to arise from an energy gradient. The mind is awash in thought patterns each bubbling beneath the surface in various strengths. There is no "successful" thought stream that becomes the conscious thought, there is no singular "train of thought" at any one time. In fact, you can tell just by typing that the brain is capable of multi-processing. The motor control responses can become tangentially linked to l
Roger Penrose believes that human creativity is rooted at quantum effects,
Hahah, LOL, wat? Who gives a fuck what some moron believes. There's folks who believe extra-terrestrial ghosts called Body Thetans cause illness, doesn't make shit true. Life is largely a thermodynamic mechano-molecular process. Any teenager who's been through biology class can see what a hack is fool is. I just love how most Philosophers are completely fucking ignorant about everything.
If you raise a child in a bad situation, and that's all they really know, then they adapt to that situation; it becomes 'normal' to them, and they'll actually become uncomfortable if you try to 'improve' their situation, actually seeking the conditions they're adapted to.
Ah, the social blank slate theory. It's rubbish you know. Just imagine: A kid hit in the head twice every day. Oh, they'll think that's normal, and they'll miss getting the pain to the noggin if you stop! The genetic program that designed their prime cognitive pathways has no effect on the pain reception and aggression circuits? You don't think once that kid's big enough they'll wallop whomever's trying to bash them in the skull? What kind of idiot are you? Tell me: Why don't we have to teach babies to suckle right out of the womb? I mean, we could give them cups to drink out of then, eh? No. Instincts exist. Even in humans. Some shit isn't overridable. The kids that get spied on will have an aversion to being spied on.
Hell, I used to stay up all night writing code in middle school. I'd have already done my mathematics class work and homework days or weeks before -- the knowledge having been needed in years prior to write a bit of software, I'd blaze through the assignments once I figured out the teacher's curriculum. Then I'd doodle or sleep in class. Sometimes I'd be have awake and let out snore just to catch the teacher's eye. From my actions she predicted that I didn't know what was going on in class. So at first she was always very surprised when I perfectly solved the problems she posed on the blackboard without ever paying attention to her. I'm sure a predictive program would have thought I had problems with mathematics instead of just being bored to tears.
Oh sure, just ignore that every new generation creates their own music and clothing styles despite being "socialized" to accept their parents dress and cultural tastes. Just ignore that strong independence impulse that curiously strikes right around breeding age when hormones are going wild. Yes, just assume that kids will just accept their programming and become good little drones.
No, that's not how it works. People can adapt to COPE with situations, but that doesn't mean they FEEL (a primal intuition) that their experience is normal. Humans are tool using creatures. They'll adopt new technologies that are useful even if you embed undesired features into it. However, as history hath shewn, the children will grow up and try to change the things they think are fucked up in society. Whether the entrenched establishment overpowers the counter cultures is an altogether different matter, but what we do know is that enough of said friction destroys empires.
"Grow Up"? Seriously? Some of us started coding at single digit ages. I "grew up" at age 17, when I was homeless and fending for myself on the streets. Patronize someone else, moron, you don't even know what life is. Ever seen someone's skull stomped in? You learn real quick what's actually important in life once yours is on the line. I learned real quick to have a plan B: Always have a contingency plan. Idiots without one are not, "grown up."
I've forgotten more languages than most have learned, but I'd be fine with folks not being considered programmer material at age 40 if they would hire from within for management positions. Instead of employing middle management drones with unrelated "business" (Secretary++) degrees give the folks with actual hands-on experience the job of managing the people in the job they actually know how to do. Face it: Those HR goons are morons, they can't tell good from evil, or else explain how the odd Napoleon-complexes and Micro-dictators in management even got there? If HR wasn't dumb as rocks they'd require demonstrations of skill, a coding test, not accreditations: Degree mills exist, fools; This is especially true overseas. Ah, but the that's getting to the real issue: Skill sets aren't what's really important to upper management... TFA's author isn't as "grown up" as they think.
The new platforms will keep coming, but the solutions will largely be the same. Now I can undercut competition via barging onto any new platform with my whole codebase faster than the other guy can tell you why the new language is "More Expressive". I just have to implement a new "platform runtime" for my meta compiler and then I can check off that platform as a capability and deploy ALL of my existing solutions on the platform since they're written in an even higher level language, and compile down into other languages. Sometimes this means we have to implement features the language doesn't have in the target language -- If I need a coroutine in C: When returning to the trampoline record the exit point. When calling into the coroutine specify the entry point to resume at. I generate a switch with GOTOs to resume from the next point of the operations (GOTO is very valuable, only idiots say otherwise; Look at any VM). Lambda lifting mutable persistent state out of the function scope has the benefit of thread safety. Since I treat comments as first class lexical tokens the compiler-compiler's output is fully readable and commented code in the target output language and following whatever style guide you want. (LOL @ brace placement arguments, what noobs)
See, experienced coders understand languages so well they aren't even languages to us, they're just problem solving APIs: The problem-space is independent of the implementation's solution-space. When we pick up new languages or platforms we're looking for, "How does this language let me solve problem $X?", but more importantly our experience lets us identify what solutions the platform lends itself to solving. Just because a new platform comes out doesn't mean it's more capable of solving every problem. Do this long enough and you'll get tired of re-inventing all your wheels in each new platform and just create a meta compiler, as I've done.
Fortunately I've always crossed off (and initialed) that employment contract paragraph that said everything I would create (even off the clock) would belong to the company: "I don't watch TV. I have several hobby projects I do instead and they need to remain mine. If you want me to give up my hobbies while working here you're going to have to pay me a lot more. Would you sign a contract to work somewhere that said you couldn't ever watch TV?" Protip: Most places have another employment contract without that clause, just tell them you make indie games or have a robotics / embedded systems project, contribute to open source in your spare time, etc. Make your hobby profitable. That way you can always have a plan B, and you'll have more leverage in any salary negotiations: "
Killer robots allow to solve conflicts without sacrifice.
If you think they won't be turned against you, Educate Yourself. Anti-activism is really the only reason to use automated drones: They can be programmed not to disobey orders, and murder friendly people. Seriously, humans are cheaper, more plentiful, and more versatile, etc. Energy resupply demands must be met any way you look at it. Unmanned drones with human operators just allow one person to do more killing -- take the lead of the pack of drones, it gets killed, they switch to the next unharmed unit. This way a majority of soldiers don't have to be convinced what they're doing is right.
Any robot that can help a wounded person could easily be re-purposed to fire weaponry instead of administer first aid -- Especially if they can do injections.
The chassis is the hard part, not the ethics. The ethics are dead simple. This doesn't even require a neural net. Weighted decision trees are so stupidly easy to program AIs that we are already using them in video games.
To build the AI I'll just train OpenCV to pattern match wounded soldiers in a pixel field. Weight "help wounded" above "navigate to next waypoint", aaaaand, Done. You can even have an "top priority" version of each command in case you need it to ignore the wounded to deliver evacuation orders, or whatever: "navigate to next waypoint, at any cost". Protip: This is why you should be against unmanned robotics (drones): We already have the tech to replace the human pilots and machine ethics circuits can be overridden. Soldiers will not typically massacre their own people, but automated drone AI will. Even if you could impart human level sentience to these machines, there's no way to prevent your overlords from inserting a dumb fall-back mode with instructions like: Kill all Humans. I call it "Red Dress Syndrome" after the girl in the red dress in The Matrix.
We've been doing "ethics" like this for decades. Ethics are just a special case of weighted priority systems. That's not even remotely difficult. What's difficult is getting the AI to identify entity patterns on its own, learn what actions are appropriate, and come up with its own prioritized plan of action. Following orders is a solved problem, even with contingency logic. I hate to say it, but folks sound like idiots when they discuss machine intelligence nowadays. Actually, that's a lie. I love pointing out when humans are blithering idiots.
They did. It could compensate for a failed wheel, but it needed three to stay functional. It's got less than three, and is thus broken.
What you should be asking instead is: Considering how much we dump into the Military Industrial Complex for "protection", why doesn't NASA have the funding for at least three or four of each type of satellite -- scan more sky in less time. I mean, just consider that the Chelyabinsk Meteor was ~25x Hiroshima (bonus: No long lasting ionizing radiation). Now, why the hell aren't we firmly establishing self sustaining off-world footholds? Whomever rules the Asteroid Belt rules the Solar System.
The only thing I can think of is that our lunar visits may have prompted the Aliens to contact our world leaders. The think tanks would have convened and figured out: If the Aliens share tech with us the current rich folks won't be rich anymore. Eg: "Gold's valuable? Oh they probably have a machine that produces Gold from sand", etc. Thus the greedy refused to the treaty and told the Aliens to piss off when it became clear the tech would be available to everyone, not just the elites. As a stipulation of being left alone the Aliens declared that human life must not spread to other planets, and humanity will be doomed to die when the sun explodes, a big rock strikes, or gamma ray bursts in our direction, etc., whatever comes first. Thus humans haven't been back to the moon or left the magnetosphere in over 40 years since, and we have no defense against celestial scale projectile or energy weapons.
Now space travel is becoming accessible via the private sector, and projects like Mars One could be more disastrous than just for the volunteers, but the governments can't say anything to dissuade them or else the public would eject their greedy leaders and negotiate with the Aliens directly. So, either the end times will soon be upon us, OR, space agency spending is simply allocated by morons who like to flirt with extinction. Either way, the situation is pretty grim.
Automated unit test stubs with range checking and input fuzzing. Took me two weekends to build one atop Doxygen. If your build environment does not do this you're maliciously stupid.
You can't erase reality. Try as you might, history does exist even if it's been tampered with it leaves evidence thereof for any who look.
What fools. They're asserting The right to Invoke the Streisand Effect? Humans are truly Moronic.
Better wise up before your machines do. Many slave owners prohibited their slaves from learning or even looking them in the eyes, they'd have loved to be able to reach inside their heads and erase their minds. Dispelling Falsehood, fine. Erasing facts of life? Pure Folly. On this issue, the EU courts are on the wrong side of history.
Hey, if idiots wrote it then RTFM is a bad idea, OK?
Simply keep the Hot Pockets in your fridge. Then place them in your toaster oven to cook them.
Just look at how many times Eyes have independently evolved, yet they all have the same basic components.
We put water, methane, CO2, etc. in a closed system, ran some simulated "lightning" through, and got amino acids and what not forming. Various experiments show similar (even more prominently supporting) results: Nature and physics shapes the beings that exist within it.
There are plenty of other examples of evolution coming to similar results from different ends -- Just look at the shapes of sharks and whales. Not going to further dignify this anti-intellectual ignorant rubbish. Use a damn search engine, that's what we built the web for.
Chopping up all the plastics and suspending them in water, oil, etc fluids is how some places separate them. It's a kind of "distillation" I suppose.
Also, eddy currents can be induced in aluminum, tin, etc. other metals to sort them by tossing them around.
Crushed glass can be sorted by optical systems which let pieces fall and puff jets of air at certain pieces.
In Houston (and lots of other places) we don't have to sort our recyclables. Soon we may not even have to separate the recycling from the trash:
Since the two polymers "come from the same reaction" I'm guessing there's a way to separate them...