Hacking by incantations?

Giving a clearcut definition to "autonomy" that is inclusive of all its uses is downright impossible. Authors in engineering argue that the term is at least context dependent (things are autonomous regarding task, environment, etc). Perhaps the best way here is to stop using "autonomy", and invent new ones.

The greeks got the credit, but lost them some years ago due to economic difficulties. The common wisdom now is that the Pythagorean theorem have been discovered by an anonymous hedge fund.

If the drug is already in use (for other purposes), wouldn't we be able to see its effects on people already?

Do you have any actual evidence to support that?

= the number of Brazilians queued at passport control in Miami Airport?

My LaTeX builds rarely fail in MiKTeX. The compiler itself seems to be able to download packages and classes from a common repository (CTAN and its many mirrors).

What IS clear is that you don't know you own field of expertise. It is well know that there IS magic involved in engineering projects, such as this one:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M...

I know that technical delays are common. But aren't they becoming too common in SpaceX? The past two or three launches have been affected by technical issues (even if not very serious). I wonder if this happen in other rocket launches also? Perhaps it is just the case that SpaceX have better means of checking for technical glitches BEFORE takeoff. But even so, wouldn't be better for them to "just" improve build quality??

And how posting this in Slashdot is going to help?

So...

1) Buy lots of radiation-free lettuce
2) Prove that there was radiation in the lettuce (natural occurring, but who cares?)
3) Sue the company for misrepresentation
4) Profit!

It is difficult to reply when you do not point the exact problem in my argument. Nevertheless, I do argue that it is probably not his fault, ultimately. But that does not imply that I defend that he should be exempt of any sanctions. Any criminal has to be punished. However, society should expect any normal human to learn and recover. If, at any point, society believes that a person probably cannot learn and recover (at any cost), it is society right to contain this person and its duty to investigate ways of doing so. If that turns to be life imprisonment, so be it. However, when an society kills someone prematurely, it removes this person right to try to learn and recover. I would accept a different argument in case society could not keep this person contained, but that is not really the case.

That cost, even if it is correct, it is negligible in the face of: (a) the risk of murdering innocents, when other methods of containment exist; (b) the shame of being one of only developed countries in the world that still implement archaic methods of containment; and (c) the fact that this sort of person and his mental condition is ultimately a result of his own unfavorable context imposed by society.

I see some (non reasonable) reasons for that phenomenon. First, it is easier to get disappointed with a 99c app than with a $800 tablet. Second, there is a perception of little value on cheap things.

Is this a car analogy to the famous porn games/sex doll argument?