Here’s what I wouldn’t build. I don’t mind playing fetch. I probably would build a robot to walk him, though.
A surprising dichotomy. I can’t say which camp I’m in, because a) I have a Droid and b) I keep it in a holster. But I keep it there right side up.
…to lighting up the moon.
One quibble. If you really bought that many one-watt green lasers, I’m sure that you’d get the price well below $300.
This will not make women obsolete, but it’s going to be rough on the prostitution profession, when the technology achieves its peak.
Of course, many prostitutes will tell you that men don’t really come (so to speak) for the sex.
And because it’s a Friday, which means cat videos, here’s what cats really are saying when they play patty cake.
Instant Internet classic.
…and didn’t even know it.
That’s what happens when you substitute a political ideology for religion.
Ah, well. As the Anchoress says, Peter got in, so maybe there’s hope for them yet.
[Update a few minutes later]
…it’s not a matter of one word more or less, one or more mentions of God. The real heart of the issue is that most of the people in that hall, in the Democratic convention, really don’t accept the understanding of rights contained in the Declaration of Independence: The Declaration appealed first to “the Laws of Nature and Nature’s God” as the very ground of our natural rights. The drafters declared that “self-evident” truth that “all men are created equal,” and then immediately: that “they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights.” George Bush was not embarrassed to insist that these are “God-given rights,” as opposed to rights that we had merely given to ourselves. For if we had given them to ourselves, we could as readily take them back or remove them. Newt Gingrich made this point during the primaries; it’s not as though the point were so esoteric as to seem mystical or somehow remote from the understanding of ordinary folks. And Paul Ryan touched on this understanding of natural rights during his own speech at the convention. He could surely respond even now by putting the question to Obama and the Democrats, and putting it in the terms of a dare and wager: If we took a survey on this matter, we bet that about 70–80 percent or more of the delegates at the Democratic convention would be too embarrassed to say that these rights were given to us by our Creator, the Author of those Laws of Nature. And we could bet that, in contrast, about 80 percent of the delegates at the Republican convention would assent to that proposition without a trace of hesitation. Why not put the question so that the heart of the matter does not fade?
I would say that I do believe in natural rights, but I don’t need to believe in God for that, any more than I need a god to provide gravity. But when people like Touré Neblett deny natural rights, they might want to consider this:
…his is not an isolated view; it is/was shared by a number of world figures: Lenin, Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Castro, Amin — just to name a few. So take heart, Touré, you’re not alone.
These people shouldn’t be allowed to vote, let alone to vote on legislation. If I lived in her district, it would be multiple face palms per day.
Here’s my new favorite. This isn’t the subject, it’s the “From”: “Pubs may generate their own and submit for approval!”
Want to split a gut? Read this insane comment over at Judy Curry’s place:
Mann’s strategic rational for the parallel lawsuit is evident, and is based upon the observation CEI and NR published startlingly similar, startlingly abusive, startling ill-judged editorials.
Mann’s Objective Publicly expose the command-and-control structure of climate-change denialism.
Mann’s Strategy Call witnesses to testify, under oath, regarding the parallel origins of their libelous assertions.
Mann’s Tactics Offer each of CEI and NR a plea-bargain, providing each “peaches” upon the other, regarding denialist marching-orders and astro-turfing operations.
Mann’s Guidance The Code of Omertà is robust at the institutional level of climate-change denialism, yet notoriously flimsy at the individual level. To exploit this weak point, Mann’s legal team will therefore focus legal pressure upon the individuals under whose name the libels were published. In particular, what services has CEI’s staff of 40 provided to denialist bloggers, and to sister institutions such as Heartland?
Predictions (1) CEI and NR will do all they can to ensure that individuals named in Mann’s suit do not testify under oath … or if they do, that their testimonies are well-rehearsed and carefully coordinated. (2) Conversely, Mann’s team will do all they can to exert pressure upon individual witnesses, in particular by calling multiple witnesses to the stand, and by deposing CEI and NR employees in separate discovery processes.
Question What portion of climate-change denialist prose, nominally originating from private citizens, in fact originates from CEI professional operatives?
I can’t really comment, other than to wonder if Mann himself believes lunacy like this?
Lately, I’ve been getting emails with no subject, no “from” and no content. Nothing but a return path, which I wouldn’t see if I didn’t display full headers. It’s just an empty email. I just got about half a dozen of them at once, each from a different return path.
Any theories about this?
This is ridiculous on multiple levels (and yes, I’d say the same thing even if it didn’t involve my alma mater).
Could Paul Ryan be president of the Senate, while remaining chairman of the House Budget Committee?
Well, if anyone could handle the workload, it would be him. Of course, it would partially depend on how much power he would try to take as president of the Senate, which has devolved to a pretty meaningless position in modern times. No reason that couldn’t change, though, depending on how amenable Mitch McConnell would be.
[Update a few minutes later]
Sorry, added missing link.
Explained, by xkcd. This experiment is much safer than the high-speed baseball pitch, but still, don’t try it at home.
Sleep vertically. An interesting picture.
Explained: it was caused by Canadian PM Harper cutting climate-change funding.
Of course! It’s so obvious now. Why didn’t I think of that?
I find it interesting that many of the spam emails I get offering me quick loans (usually on the order of a thousand or fifteen hundred or so) use the word “loot” in the subject line to describe the funds (e.g., “We’ve got the loot the get back in your bankroll!”). I wonder if this is a deliberate connotation of theft, or just a poor understanding of the historical meaning of the word on the part of the spammer?
The name of the hospital where this moron went after performing his cheeky stunt is quite ironic.
When I saw this headline, I thought that science had come up with a huge breakthrough, and a great alternative to fly swatters. Needless to say, I was disappointed.
News you can use, guys — why it hurts so much.
No, Mr. President, you’ve been making a lot of mistakes as president, but there has been no shortage of stories you’ve been telling the public.
Let’s see, shall we count them?
- My administration will be the most transparent in history.
- If you like your doctor and your insurance, you can keep them.
- I’ll go through the budget line by line and find places to cut.
- It’s not a tax. Except when it is.
- I will cut the deficit in half.
- If we pass this stimulus, unemployment will never go above eight percent.
I could go on and on.
The latest listings. I like the second one.
Pretty hard to top this guy’s life.
Explain why warm water freezes faster than cold.
Asking the important questions about an extraterrestrial invasion, over at National Geographic.
Actually, if you care about your wireless security, you’ll turn SSID broadcast off on the router.
A concussion that turned a man into a musical savant.