That's our old IP and by old I mean from ~2 months ago. You can either 1) change your DNS servers to point at something like Google's public DNS servers (8.8.8.8 and 8.8.4.4) or 2) update your "hosts" file to explicitly override the domain's IP.

(You may also want to first try flushing your DNS just in case it happens to be your computer's DNS cache that's at issue, which I'm guessing it probably isn't.)

Well, perhaps with currently available public domain parts, it's not possible. That doesn't mean it's completely impossible.
The flexible frame might be hard, but there ARE already wristbands that un-bend to make a flat device, they've been around for decades, I recall seeing one in the 90's. Making it support flight might be hard, but not impossible, especially with the small forces this thing provides.
You say there are already 2" square quads out there, this was closer to 18"square(6"X3"), so the 'it's just too small' argument falls flat.
Battery time might be a factor, but a 5 min video is pretty good for now, plenty to prove the concept. Also, battery life is increasing fast.
The camera and GPS in a phone hardly uses any battery power too. These tiny devices are really not hungry enough to make them a power drain problem, at worst they might limit flight time slightly. Also, there's no GPS needed really, it could operate by keeping the subject in frame at approximately the same distance...then it could just follow you through the trees, using the image to avoid obstacles. It would take some computing power, but not an outrageous amount. Perhaps it's paired with a cell phone to do the computing? That part wouldn't be hard.
Again, because the tech isn't available on the market today (and I'm not at all sure that's correct) doesn't mean the tech isn't available to some, or creatable by intelligent people. I just don't see this as that far away.
EDIT: The airdog seems like it's everything this wants to be, but large enough for a go-pro. I see no reason at all they couldn't miniaturize it all.
Flexable/foldable frame...check. Size issue...check. Battery life...irrelevant (so long as you get over 1 minute)...so check. What were the other 2 technologies you say don't exist?

I think the issue is quite well documented in the video.

In the video, the engineer learns that the NSA has stolen his credentials and used them to gain access to his company's private, otherwise secure network.

The map shown in the video is not a routing table, nor is it a colorful map of domain records associated with a given domain such as appears in your Robtex link. It's actually a copy of the NSA's rendering of the network map denoting the number of nodes they have penetrated.

He then realizes that the NSA can use this particular access to intercept communications from any and all of his company's customers, and, in the case of satellite customers, use geolocation to pinpoint the physical origin of a given communication.

If you don't agree that this is outrageous, then there's nothing more to discuss.

"Videojug no longer permits this content to be viewed on this domain." *dead

This chatter misses the main point.

Civil rights. The right to go about your own /consensual/ business with any number of other /consenting/ persons.

Rights to live your own life in peace, without bothering anyone else, and without being bothered.

Owning a gun harms no one. It's a personal matter. It has zero affect on anyone else.

Suicide is personal and consensual. It's nobody else's domain to judge. It's a simple property issue, about the most personal property that exists. Other people don't own your body. The clean-up crew was already paid for by the dead person's taxes (they aren't paid to sit around). Your family/friends, if they respected your wishes, they wouldn't criticize. God does not own you, and you don't have to worry about what he thinks.

Shooting NON CONSENTING individuals is a trespass onto those people, and it is wrong. These people should be punished accordingly, individually, for /their/ individual trespasses.

People at large should not be punished or have their rights taken away because of what someone else did. It's not their business.
That goes for guns, drugs, whatever else is strictly personal/consensual.



On a more specific note :
Having a gun does not necessitate killing.
Killing does not necessitate having a gun.
There is not a deterministic connection between killing and having guns.
For every example where 'gun control' and 'lower gun deaths' statistically aligned, there is another to show them not statistically aligned - precisely because one does not necessitate the other - and correlation is not causation.

I'm all for extremely hard punishment for killers - if it can be proven undeniably that they did it (high rez video / multiple close witnesses personally familiar with the killer / the like).
But I'm not interested in punishing anyone else for what they did.
(Just like I don't want to send drug users to jail because /someone else/ had a drug problem)

As far as I'm concerned, we have far too many laws that do not require any harm to be done to get your into trouble.

~5000 federal laws, thousands more per state, hundreds per county, hundreds per city, many with implementation guidelines defined by bureaucrats that outline multiple ways to violate each one.

It's a minefield. Everyone commits on average (according to some lawyer that wrote a book about it) around 3 felonies a day - when you do a complete review of their activities.
With 1 in 18 men in jail/on parole/in the system - do you really think we need to be sending more people to jail for having something and doing no harm with it?

How about focusing on the people doing harm - punishing in proportion to the harm done - but ignorant of what they used to do the harm.
What matters most is the suffering of the victims, not society's grimaces/preferances.

-scheherazade

Sift Rules State that no posting of full episodes.
Not sure Ban is in order here - maybe education and a warning.

37.4 Posting Guidlines: Please do not post entire episodes of television shows or movies, unless you know beyond a shadow of a doubt they are in the public domain. That's what BitTorrent is for.

http://videosift.com/faq#terms

Delve Deeper:
Part one of the series: vimeo.com/84022735
The series was part inspired by Mastery by Robert Greene
amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B009U1U2IU/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1634&creative=19450&creativeASIN=B009U1U2IU&linkCode=as2&tag=adammeetsworl-21
You can read more about Leonardo daVinci's difficult years in: "Da Vinci's Ghost: Genius, Obsession and how Leonard Created the World in his Own Image" by Toby Lester amazon.co.uk/gp/product/1439189242/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1634&creative=19450&creativeASIN=1439189242&linkCode=as2&tag=adammeetsworl-21
This series began life as a couple of essays on Medium
Difficult medium.com/i-m-h-o/a7f8bdabd67b
47 years to success medium.com/the-dept-for-dangerous-ideas/8654ee14e4b2
====
Released under a Creative Commons Licence 3.0 - Remix & share with non-commercial attribution
Credits:
All paintings and archive in the Public Domain via Wikimedia Commons & Prelinger Archives
The Craig Ferguson Show © CBS
Music released under a Creative Commons Licence
"Lullaby" by _ghost (soundcloud.com/ghost-14)
"Hungaria" by Latché Swing (jamendo.com/en/artist/latche_swing_(3)
"July" by Marcel Pequel (last.fm/music/Marcel+Pequel)
"One" by Marcel Pequel (last.fm/music/Marcel+Pequel)
"Todo se precipita a tu alrededor deprisa" by Ruido Blanco
John Coltrane By Gelderen, Hugo van / Anefo [CC-BY-SA-3.0-nl (creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/nl/deed.en)], via Wikimedia Commons
John Lennon By Roy Kerwood [CC-BY-2.5 (creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5)], via Wikimedia Commons
Sir Alec Guinness By Allan warren → allanwarren.com [CC-BY-SA-3.0 (creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0) or GFDL (gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html)], via Wikimedia Commons
Tim Berners Lee By John S. and James L. Knight Foundation [CC-BY-SA-2.0 (creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons
Rafael Nadal By Steven Byles from Singapore, Singapore (Rafael Nadal Uploaded by russavia) [CC-BY-SA-2.0 (creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons
Steve Jobs By Matthew YoheAido2002 at en.wikipedia [CC-BY-3.0 (creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0)], from Wikimedia Commons
Bill Gates By Kees de Vos from The Hague, The Netherlands [CC-BY-SA-2.0 (creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons
Richard Branson By David Shankbone [CC-BY-3.0 (creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0)], via Wikimedia Commons
Bob Dylan by Chris Hakkens
Horse statue By Jenny Poole from London, UK (Skopje horse statue Uploaded by raso_mk) [CC-BY-2.0 (creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons
Mark Zuckerberg :Credit line on the web (with hyperlink): Guillaume Paumier, CC-BY.
One Direction: Fiona McKinlay
Miley Cyrus: Mike Schmid
Taylor Swift: By Eva Rinaldi from Sydney Australia (Taylor Swift Uploaded by russavia) [CC-BY-SA-2.0 (creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons
Subtitles:
Spanish by Ana Ribera Molinos about.me/anaribera
Portuguese by Gustavo Silveira
Story Design and Production by Adam Westbrook
adamwestbrook.co.uk
Published by
delve.tv

DELVE DEEPER
For more on Leonardo DaVinci's little known early years take a look at:
"Da Vinci's Ghost: Genius, Obsession and how Leonard Created the World in his Own Image" by Toby Lester amazon.co.uk/gp/product/1439189242/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1634&creative=19450&creativeASIN=1439189242&linkCode=as2&tag=adammeetsworl-21
"Leonardo and the age of the eye" by Ritchie Calder
"Mastery" by Robert Greene amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B009U1U2IU/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1634&creative=19450&creativeASIN=B009U1U2IU&linkCode=as2&tag=adammeetsworl-21
This series began life as a couple of essays on Medium
Difficult medium.com/i-m-h-o/a7f8bdabd67b
47 years to success medium.com/the-dept-for-dangerous-ideas/8654ee14e4b2
Sources:
All paintings and archive in the Public Domain via Wikimedia Commons & Prelinger Archives
Ultimate Fails Compilation: youtube.com/watch?v=Ujwod-vqyqA
The Craig Ferguson Show © CBS
Music released under a Creative Commons Licence
"Nola" by Broke for Free soundcloud.com/broke-for-free
"Lullaby" by _ghost soundcloud.com/ghost-14
With extracts from:
"Frozen Star" by Kevin Macleod incompetech.com
"William Tell Overture" by Giachino Rossini
Translations:
Spanish by: Elena Sanchez
Portuguese: Gustavo Silveira
Story Design and Production by Adam Westbrook
adamwestbrook.co.uk
Published by
delve.tv

Reaction times yes, but I think having a sufficient degree of certainty that the correct decision will be made is hard to conceive.

Imagine the legal liability of a clear software failure. Even if average accident rates were lower for automated cars, a clear incidence of failure would be a huge monetary legal risk. Whereas, if legal exceptions were carved out for the likes of Google, I doubt there would be very good consumer uptake.

I would suspect their automation algorithm are highly based on visual inputs. Pre-available GPS mapping data would get them only so far. These visual inputs are hugely variable. The number of different car makes, times of day, weather and road conditions among other things, would make for a incredible amount of scenarios to envisage.

I think voice recognition is very similar, if anything more constrained. The deciphering of combination of pitch, accent and pronunciation is a far simpler and smaller domain that we haven't mastered. That would seem to me to be demonstrable proof that automated cars to the level of reliability we would expect, are currently inconceivable.

hmm how does this work?

*backup=<object id="flashObj" width="560" height="315" classid="clsid:D27CDB6E-AE6D-11cf-96B8-444553540000" codebase="http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=9,0,47,0">

So if an individual or a company spends hundreds of hours or millions of dollars creating something that only exists in the digital realm, everyone has the right to copy it or even resell it? Is that seriously your position?

Copyright is not only not out of date, it is more relevant than ever.

The problem is that corporations are abusing it. Copyright was meant to give a creator a reasonable period of time to earn a living from their work and then it went back to the public domain. This has now been perverted by the likes of Disney to mean "we own this shit forever" (the irony being they made their fortune from public domain stories).

But copyright as a concept is still totally valid. I write software for a living. Some stuff, I give away. But that's my decision. I'm sure as hell not giving up my livelihood because you read some Stallman.

Without any kind of malice or hatred, i tell you that scientists *know* that humans are causing climate change. You will not find the scientific community in any kind of debate.

What the government and corporations do with the information is an entirely different matter. They lie, manipulate, cheat and steal and use it as a tool if they can. But don't question the science, because the science is there for you to see on the website. NASA have a .gov related domain probably because they are one of the most important scientific bodies on the planet and need the kind of internet protection and security that the government can provide. They need the protection or NASA goes offline and with it the base of communications for the majority of space operations.

Anything NASA does will be scientifically sound because the entire world community of scientists would never stand for it, they'd be a laughing stock for trying. Don't forget that the scientific community includes Russia for example - or any "enemy of the west" you choose. All research is available to everyone and anyone, so if you think NASA is somehow corrupt and publishes bullshit then why haven't equally corrupt russian scientists exposed and scored points off it?

http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence

The evidence is there, and the scientific community believes in it. That includes universities full of teachers and students, it includes any scientist that adheres to the scientific method, anywhere in the world.

I am an original artist who makes my own videos and music so why the 'ban?' Are music videos not legitimate, so why music as a category? The footage is, as far as I am aware, in the public domain and i have altered and edited it. I'm just angry at the harsh response. I cant find how to remove the video and apparently you cant delete your account.

Ortiz and Obama take a selfie

<embed wmode="transparent" allowscriptaccess="always" allowscriptaccess="always" src="http://c.brightcove.com/services/viewer/federated_f9?isVid=1&isUI=1" bgcolor="#FFFFFF" flashVars="videoId=3284437680001&linkBaseURL=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ifc.com%2Fportlandia%2Fvideos%2Fportlandia-treat-your-lover-like-your-dog&playerID=88218
671001&playerKey=AQ~~,AAAAAAAn_zM~,B6LaFUvNnt2RhwK5cjOvZ4hHQyd5XXC9&domain=embed&dynamicStreaming=true" base="http://admin.brightcove.com" name="flashObj" width="485" height="272" seamlesstabbing="false" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowFullScreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" swLiveConnect="true" pluginspage="http://www.macromedia.com/shockwave/download/index.cgi?P1_Prod_Version=ShockwaveFlash"></embed>

Should look like this: