Ooh, finally a horror game that isn't just running and gunning. "With just a prayer..." yes, yes "... father Geiger powers up his pistols..." -_-

Pushing the car in neutral seems easier, but even if it's not a great reverse system, it looks like an excellent way to teach his son about physics and problem solving. I solved a puzzle in a computer game in a similar way once, and I still feel proud about it.

Everyone watching this knows to be more cautious in the future, so the guy filming might have actually done more good than anyone else. It's really hard to say.

Wow. Those were all spot on. They all sound like something he'd write.

This looks fantastic! The voice acting and sound quality seem especially good.

Best ever though? Vilja is another great companion mod (with 9000 lines of dialog) that is also competing for that title. The production values of that mod aren't as immediately impressive as Inigo's, but it's full of surprises.

I'm pretty sure he meant to say that the temperatures on Mars are *raising* exactly as they are here. That's an incredibly common argument against man made global warming. He left out one incredibly important word, but I can chalk that up to simply misspeaking rather than being completely oblivious about science.

He could still be wrong, of course, but let's not take things out of context and attack him for stumbling a bit over words (assuming that's what this is). If we do that, then only people who are excellent with words will ever be elected. I would like to see more scientists and engineers elected, and in my experience they stumble over words more often than most.

Shrug... It's better than eating pizza and not working out.

The CV/AI (computer vision/artificial intelligence, I assume) challenge is certainly the more interesting part of this competition. The trouble I have with many man vs machine competitions is that it's often possible to design a robot that focuses on just one specific aspect of the game that it can do so well that it renders complex CV/AI work obsolete. Robots can often win in uninteresting ways that make the competition boring to watch. And humans can often exploit AI flaws or physical limitations of the robot to claim victory in equally non-spectator friendly ways.

In ping pong, if a robot can position its paddle in the right place to return a ball at all, it should be able to return it so fast that a human couldn't stop it. Strength and speed are the easy part. At the very least, the robot is pulling its punches (or more likely, it was not designed to punch as hard as it could have).

The competition just seems staged as a result. My guess is that both the human player and the robot are purposefully playing in such a way to create the most interesting looking match, rather than playing in the way most likely to win.

Actually.. wait... ping pong serves have to bounce on both sides of the net, right? That probably implies a max speed since if the ball is going too fast, you couldn't bounce on your side, clear the net, and also land on your opponent's side of the table without traveling too far. There may be room for an actual competition here.

I would think a robot could be built that can simply serve balls so insanely fast that a human could barely hope to return them. This serving robot could beat the best human players even if it had no way to play an actual back and forth game of ping pong... provided it got to serve first, or course.

Funny, but It seems irresponsible to drive around with so much of your vision blocked.

It takes energy to deform/compress the block in order to make room for the bullet. I think the bullet travels further into the block when it hits head on. When the bullet hits off to the side, some of the energy is able to be spent on rotating the block instead of compressing the block.

It seems like this prank has the potential to go horribly wrong.

Another traveler might see the photos, think they're real, and attack the target in some way (unless everyone in the surrounding area is in on the joke).

It's also possible the target could end up being a criminal, coincidentally. Though I guess that's a risk with all pranks.

Lindsey Stirling, with an i.

"But I guess what I'm saying is, if you're going to make that judgment and you're going to take it to the next level and try to interfere in other peoples' lives and force them bear children they don't want and care for them for the next 18 years, then the burden of proof is on you to show that your judgment is indeed the correct one."

Why is the burden of proof on pro-lifers for this one? If a fetus is a person before it is born, abortions "interfere" with other peoples' lives at least as much as forcing someone to undergo an unwanted pregnancy. It's just as defensible to say the pro-choice side should have to prove a fetus is not a person before they strip it of all of its rights by killing it.