> Basing emplyment on IQ is pointless as it doesn't actually predict "real-world" performance.

IQ does correlate with job performance, especially for higher-complexity jobs.

See, for example:

http://faculty.washington.edu/mdj3/MGMT580/Readings/Week%202/Schmidt.pdf

I used to use rxvt, but I couldn't get Unicode to work in it, so I switched to puttycyg.

Heaven's Gate the 1980 box office bomb, not the religious cult.

And also not to be confused with Gates of Heaven (1978), Errol Morris's first film, a documentary about pet cemeteries--which is quite good.

It won't be long before we're able to identify all kinds of disorders and diseases with a simple genetic screening. Then we just call having a 90% chance to develop cancer a pre-existing condition, and you're screwed.

There is a law against that that just went into effect.

Also, people don't actually have that many lethal genes. There's the whole natural selection thing going on.

Congress shall accept no donations but from the People.

Corporations have been banned from donating to candidates in Federal elections since 1907. When you hear "Microsoft donated $27,000 to Jay Inslee", it actually means that individuals associated with Microsoft donated the money. (Well, corporations are allowed to give some to PACs, but it's limited.)

Something tells me that if you do the math, cutting CO2 emissions will be way cheaper and safer than any of the options listed in the article. Seeding the oceans with iron, one of the more reasonable sounding ideas... OK, but how much iron would have to be mixed into the oceans to get rid of billions of tons of atmospheric carbon? At what cost?

No. The math has been done and the geo-engineering solutions are thousands of times cheaper than reducing CO2 emissions.