Like electronics ... fine tuning is everything! Strains are targeted for specific needs these days ... ain't life grand?

I love mechanical elegance like this. Electronics can do all sorts of fabulous things these days but it's all gone way beyond my understanding. I'm sure there is every bit as much elegance in good programming as there is here but I just can't see it, understand it.

This is such an elegant and simple mechanism, every bit does what it needs to do, and integrates perfectly with all the other parts. Everything just works together as it should. Beautiful.

She brings beat boxing to the electronic style dubstep world in a way I really like.

A computer big enough to accurately calculate the position and properties of every "particle" (and ever decreasing subdivisions of energy and matter) would need to be the size of the universe in the first place. We can't even simulate enough particles in an n-body simulation to match the number of stars in a galaxy, let alone individual molecules, or shall we go further and say atoms, or further and say protons, neutrons and electrons? And that's for ONE galaxy amongst hundreds of billions in the OBSERVABLE universe... using only ONE force - gravity!

The guy has a great point about the Big Bang - a billion billion galaxies worth of matter and energy created in a split second from nothing? Doesn't sound like like the conservation of energy that is so fundamental to physics, right? But that's no reason to throw out hundreds of years of evidence and research which has proven conservation of energy to be true since then. The big bang makes the most sense given what we see today... if you want to propose a better theory, it has to make more sense than the Big Bang theory. Saying that the big bang doesn't make sense is not an appropriate starting point for a new theory, and doesn't lead to "so therefore we're in a simulation."

And it's not good enough to appeal to simplicity like @robdot is doing - basically saying that everything we see could very easily be an illusion for our benefit. That's an argument for God, in my opinion... just like how religious fanatics say "it was God's will for this to happen" we'd instead say "well, that's what the simulation wanted to show us" and call it a day. Furthermore if the manifestations of physical laws out there in the universe are illusions, they are at least consistent illusions that we can calculate and predict. And in that case, what is the difference to our lives whether we call it "reality" or "simulation" or "computer"? It it still what we always knew it was. If something created our universe and allowed it to run like a simulation, it is almost certainly intangible to us and for all intents and purposes meaningless too, because we can't touch, feel, see or understand it on any level.

This is one of the topics i asked of my favourite professor - how can we trust what we see if it could be faked, and what exists beyond our universe? His answer was, if i have to doubt what i see, i might as well not do anything at all, and if you want an answer to the second question talk to a philosopher. This is a philosophical discussion, not a scientific one. The scientific method doesn't care what you call the place you live in nor "who" we think "created" it. You can't hope to understand anything if you don't base it on the evidence you have. You certainly can't form a theory on the basis that all evidence is untrustworthy.

247mph isn't too ridiculous (though still insane). Pretty much all sports bikes are electronically limited to 299km/h (186mph), which is sort of an unofficial industry agreed standard arrived at in the earlyto mid nineties when the marketing was dominated by top speeds and it was getting out of hand. It's not something that someone determined couldn't bypass relatively easily though (and probably doesn't apply at all to track bikes).

Jalopnik claimed http://hooniverse.com/2015/06/15/monday-video-kawasaki-catches-fire-at-247-mph/ as the original source, and it was their claim of 247mph... maybe it was really 247kph? They didn't post sources, and it didn't come from the original yt vid. Jimbo's big bag'o'trivia claims the bike has an electronically restricted top speed of 299km/h.

It is not just clothes too. What about electronics like Apple stuff?

Your video, Vintage Electronics - The Tefifon, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Sure. I love cyberpunk and I follow JEGA on facebook (awesome Electronic artist), he just posted all this to his page today.
I just had to post this here.

Looks like they took a clue from the Nissan Skylines ATTESA E-TS Pro system. (Advanced Total Traction Engineering System for All-Terrain - Electronic Torque Split )

That comment is a reflection on what I hear on a daily basis.
Perhaps my wordage is off, but the stuff coming at us 24-7 is created by studios, not musicians. So much of what I hear is produced by guys sitting at mixer boards and computers.
My comment isn't aimed at every person out there making music, in fact I know there are lots of musicians out there with talent and skill..., but we never get to hear them over all the crap being dealt out by the industry which is breeding Egos as musicians. (I'd choose Beck over Beyonce any day of the week.)

Sure, I know, it may seem like I'm digging a hole and jumping in but the system is broken and the good music is being squelched. Maybe not 100% of the time, but listen to the music. The electronic age is filtering everything out of the music, no more drummer, no guitar, auto tune, synthetic voice. where is all the character? Where are all the happy accidents that real music serves us. How many of today's artistes (on the charts) can serve us music without a guy mixing it to make them sound good, double tracking, and keeping their voices in tune? I know these tricks have been used for years but never to the extent they are being used today.

I remember a quote by Niel Young, way back when he was recording. The guys at the board keep telling him he wasn't hitting the note, and his answer was "Hey, that's my style man!" So they had to leave it in, and the result was great. Pure Niel Young.

So, I guess it's not so much the musicians out there, so much as it is the recording studios, and the system of pump out the next clone hit...

It was Tony James that initiated this era, back when he created Sigue Sigue Sputnik. He had a dream, a vision of what the band looked and sounded like. He hired people that looked like what he wanted, none could play music, he taught them three chords and they they became the number one, unrecorded, unsigned band in history, and EMI finally Won (relative term) by offering them the most money. From that point all the music was produces electronically in the studio. It sounded like crap, but I loved it. It was new and sounded different. And people ate it up. The studios caught on, and realized they didn't need musicians any more, they always wanted money. It made more sense to hire nobodies, they were a dime a dozon and they could be made to sound any way they wanted them too. Just like the Boy Bands and Girl Bands (Spice girls, Pussy Cat Dolls)

Okay... so I'm rambling now..., it's been a long day...
The industry feeds us synthetic garbage because it's cheep, makes money and is easily replaced by the next song/artist.

Meanwhile the real artists are doing everything they can to get recognized and struggle to make a living giving us their soul served in a song and doing everything they can to be heard over the sounds of the industry.

Unfortunately, we'll have to start buying a lot more lunchboxes and action figures to get them to consider us. Maybe Samsung, Apple and company can start releasing Star Wars branded electronic gadgets.

Your video, Koenigsegg Agera R's Electronic Stability Control Is Insane, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

This achievement has earned you your "Pop Star" Level 12 Badge!

A spark is electrons moving rapidly from one place to another. But we see the spark. We can't see electrons. We can only see photons. So what's going on? Is a spark electrons or photons, or both?

Neither, they've stimulated an oscillation of the free surface electrons in a wire and taken a diffraction pattern of that standing wave of electrons, using an electron microscope. It's sensationalism.