As this summer's Navy SEAL beatdown briefly brought to the world's attention, there's a festering piracy problem in the waters off the Horn of Africa. The pirates, in large part unchallenged, are growing bolder, striking in waters as far out as 1,000 nautical miles from Somali shores. Patrolling such large part swath of the Indian Ocean might be impossible if not for the tech the U.S. has recently rolled out to protect her maritime interests: unmanned Reaper drones armed with infrared eyes.
Yes, that's right *humans*. Kill more people. That's what you are good at. Kill, kill, kill. Kill, kill, kill. There, fixed that for ya.
In 2008, the International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF) banned double amputee Oscar Pistorius from racing in the 2008 Summer Olympics. Later that same year, the ban was reversed. The back and forth centered on Pistorius' specially designed, spring-loaded, prosthetic legs. The IAAF argued that artificial legs designed especially for running gave Pistorius an unfair advantage against runners whose flesh-and-blood limbs didn't benefit from advanced engineering and space-age materials. While an MIT study last year eventually led to the overturn of the original IAAF decision, no one had done a systematic study of amputee racers in general. Now, the MIT researchers that investigated Pistorius have released the results of a wider trial, and it turns out that specially designed prostheses don't actually help sprinters.
I have a sure fire way of telling the difference. Put two athletes with differing prosthetics in a race and see if they complain about the others prosthetic being (lighter, smaller, better sprung or whatever). If they complain then we know there is a difference between the prosthetics themselves and thus we can infer that there absolutely is a difference in performance from a prosthetic to a meat. since all prosthetics are not created equal, but humans essentially are. In reality though, a runner using a prosthetic trains and builds different enough muscle groups for the competition to be flawed. IMHO
As Doctor Hibert so eloquently put, "only one in two million people has what we call the "evil gene". Hitler had it, Walt Disney had it, and Freddy Quimby has it." And while we understand that line as a joke, it seems that an Italian court has taken the idea far more seriously.
Finding a reason for negative behavior does not excuse a person from doing that behavior. Nor does it reduce their culpability. Their supposed inability to control themselves means that they need to have a severe reduction in their personal freedoms. If you cannot help hurting others you're a bigger threat than someone who can.
Security agencies have long used the canine nose to sniff out contraband like explosives, drugs, human traffic and the like by picking up the scent of criminals’ illegal cargo. Now British scientists are developing two sensor systems that sniff out the criminals themselves by zeroing in on a specific pheromone emitted when humans are in stressful, fearful situations.
How about creation of a highly stressful environment, then making it worse by giving authority beyond their means of control to underpaid people. Then lets set up sensors to determine who finds it stressfull being in this environment. Then we'll use that data to 'prove' the stressed out types are criminal. I cannot wait until an agoraphobic person has the misfortune of entering an airport.
Whether they're tossed with Old Bay and served in a sandwich, fried at Great NY Noodle Town, or sauteed as a base for pasta, soft shell crabs always come out delicious. Unfortunately, this delicacy is only available a few times a year. But hopefully not for long.
I'll put money down that they will taste substantially different. Considering that the hormone is still being produced just the receptors have been blocked. Side effects? What else does this chemical block inadvertently.
A new public health study released just in time for Global Handwashing Day (today!) offers not one but two gems of Science-Confirms-the-Obvious wisdom. Firstly: the gee-whizzer that men have poorer personal hygiene than women. Secondly, that people are more likely to wash their hands when others are watching.
Our immune system is for the most part reactive, requiring access to foreign stimulus to become more robust. It seems to me the more hand washing one does, the less opportunity ones immune system gets to come into contact with pathological bacteria, virus', and parasites. I'm not saying we should all be running around with filthy hands, but since our health is dependent on a little access to dirt, being ludicrous about hand washing seems counter-productive. Of course I'm wholly unsurprised that this research comes out of the ultimate nanny-state.
There’s a little bit of water inside each kernel of popcorn, and if you can heat the kernel above 212°F, that water should boil, turn into high-pressure steam, and pop the kernel. But in orbit, things aren’t so simple. First off, the cold vacuum of space would suck all the water out of the kernel before it could pop the corn. So any ordinary kernels would drop, not pop. But let’s say we figured out a way to keep the kernel watertight. In that case, it all depends.
Wouldnt the water inside the kernel boil when the kernel was exposed to the vacuum of space? Prior to entry into our atmosphere?
Everyone knows Halo gamers don't sleep. But now a group of scientists in Sweden have published new research linking violent video games to increased heart rate variability and sleep disruptions.
Oh for those that want to read the actual abstract. http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/121504559/abstract Oh and by the way they did this for a total of three times per kid. Two nights playing violent video games and one not playing. Now this sounds more like a stunted study to prove a point rather than real science.
Everyone knows Halo gamers don't sleep. But now a group of scientists in Sweden have published new research linking violent video games to increased heart rate variability and sleep disruptions.
With only a study group of 19 children and teens no less, in the very prime of hormonal imbalance, Im afraid I cannot take this study seriously. The group is much too small to make any concrete claims about video games. Furthermore the fact that they are testing teens who are in a pretty well constant state of stress due to hormonal changes and social pressures. The theoretical-pee-your-pants that was thrown in there lessens my opinion of this study even further. If this was truly about protecting children they should have taken it more seriously.
It was only a matter of time before pop-news outlets pounced on a biological explanation for the tidal wave of bad credit and risky decisions that has engulfed the U.S. this month: it was those dang men and their raging hormones!
Mind boggling. A story bad mouthing men through naive research and oversimplification. Surprise surprise its written by two women. Did they do a proper study and include women in it? No. They clearly had a premise (men are bad and are ruining this world) and did research to prove that faulty premise. This article is basically a sexist agreement of their bad research, and oh my god, its written by a female. If this story was about the other gender, you can bet womens rights groups would be banging on pop-sci's proverbial door. Its disgusting how far the pendulum has swung to the opposite side.
Stay up to date on the latest news of the future of science and technology from your iPhone with full articles, images and offline viewing
Featuring every article from the magazine and website, plus links from around the Web. Also see our PopSci DIY feed
Share links with friends, comment on stories and more
In our December issue, Popular Science names the 100 best innovations of the year: bombproof wallpaper, self-parking cars, the fastest helicopter, and 97 more. Plus inventor profiles and videos.
Check out the best of what's new here.