49 karma · joined April 28, 2011
(Forgot exactly where I saw this. Hopefully someone can provide a source.)
EDIT: Looks like recently they've been able to actually rewire nerves. Short video here: http://www.newscientist.com/blogs/nstv/2011/02/bionic-arm-wi...
Even if those systems are integral to brain function, I'd assume that they are easier to simulate than the brain itself. Is it important to build a "brain simulation" instead of a "full body simulation"?
From the article:
> A 5.9-foot (1.8-meter) telescope at Mount John University Observatory in New Zealand is used to regularly scan the copious stars at the center of our galaxy for gravitational microlensing events. These occur when something, such as a star or planet, passes in front of another, more distant star. The passing body's gravity warps the light of the background star, causing it to magnify and brighten. Heftier passing bodies, like massive stars, will warp the light of the background star to a greater extent, resulting in brightening events that can last weeks. Small planet-size bodies will cause less of a distortion, and brighten a star for only a few days or less.
To clarify hasenj's point about the more expensive thing being "worth 10x more", imagine that an expensive couch will last you 10 times longer than the cheap one (in addition to being more comfortable), but it will cost you twice as much. If owning a couch is an essential part of your desired lifestyle, then buying the more expensive couch is just the logical choice.
Of course, the real question is whether or not you really need couch? This is obviously a matter personal preference, but your present decision-making should incorporate your future preferences as well. There is often a lot of uncertainty in gauging your future level of need/want for a given product, which makes this a tricky game.
Article: http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/09/01/08/apple_files_pa...
Patent: http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Se...
But if the overwhelming majority of US citizens do in fact believe that the actions of the bank executives should be illegal, the logical thing to do would be to change the laws. (Of course, this solution is a bit unsatisfying, since no one can accurately predict these major market collapses and the next major crisis will likely be different enough that it could very well fall outside scope of any new laws.)
Sidenote: Unfortunately, the recent conviction of Raj Rajaratnam will probably assuage public anger while not at all addressing this issue. From what I understand, he was found guilty of insider trading, which is more or less unrelated to the mortgage-bubble/financial-crisis.
(I know it's easy to spoof the user agent, but that seems underhanded/nefarious.)
You must have either seen this or you don't need to.
An alternative (and simpler) explanation for the purpose of beds that I read somewhere is that they play a role in night-time thermo-regulation. (I can't find the source now. It probably wasn't very scientific.) The idea was that humans evolved in warmer climates than most live now, so they require additional night-time insulation.
Is this a privacy issue? Strictly speaking, I don't think it is any less legal than flickr (but IANAL). But it definitely pushes the boundaries when it comes to thinking about your own personal privacy.