These competitions never give out cash prizes for theory, they only pay off for actual working prototypes. Otherwise SpaceX would be a movie, as would Deepflight and whatever they called the solar plane...along with dozens of other technologies that have come from these competitions. They just don't pay off on these competitions unless you can PROVE you solved the problems (known AND unknown) and MADE at least one prototype that works.
Intel is no dummy. They know full well you can use their own product to create a video showing anything you wish, so they would NOT be 'conned' out of $500000 with a video. That's a silly thing to say.
I'll come back and tell you that you seem to be wrong today. :-)

EDIT: Don't get me wrong, you may be right it will take 5 years to make them cheap and durable enough to sell them.

No, this is not the "next level" of music.

Don't get me wrong, it's a decent tune, and there's certainly some impressive looping happening... but it's nothing that hasn't been done before.

Harassment is a bad thing, but I feel very sorry for anyone that does not engage in general pleasantness, and finds phrases like "how are you?" and "nice day!" to be a form of harassment. Worst still, to chastise and publicly present them as harassers on youtube .. what sort of lowlife do you have to be to do that? I don't care how many actual harassers you caught, that is not an acceptable method so put the net away and get the fishing rod out.

I say things like hello, nice day.. And if i'm in a queue and i think of something to say that i think someone might find funny or help someone out, i'll say it. I don't expect a reply, but if there's a fun person around then it might pass the time better. I asked someone of the female persuasion at my pool the other week if they were looking for the sauna (slightly hidden away) because i heard her talking to what i assume was her husband about the sauna. I do that for old men, old ladies, fat blokes, skinny women; all sorts.. i offer men and women help out of the jacuzzi if they need it. Her reaction was to say "No..... WHY?" very pointedly.

Well you know what? Fuck her - i did something nice and now she's the one that's being rude to others. I cannot fucking stand the high and mighty attitude of these people, as though they have never been guilty of accidentally doing something other people didn't want them to do. As though they have an inbuilt capability to read the motive of other people. Obviously i offered to explain the location of the sauna because i wanted to have sex with her in it (yeah, sex in a disgusting public sweat box & burnt genitals, my favourite), god forbid someone actually be nice to someone else. I felt like being rude back, but that'd make me worse than her.

There is a very fine line between being an activist against harassment, and being an unhinged arsehole who goes around over reacting and getting the wrong end of the stick and hurting people who were showing genuine honesty. I'm so sorry if you've been harassed in the past, but you don't see victims of domestic abuse blaming everyone that looks/talks at them funny in the street for all the pain they've suffered - which is substantially more painful and personality-warping than the average activist blogger jumping on the "trigger-warning" bangwagon.

Harassment exists and this blanket of "harassment" that these videos engender for all sorts of shit is distracting us from that issue, and to some degree turning people against the issue..... I mean, if i get unfairly treated like a scumbag for years by "mostly" women who assume i'm harassing them, do i get license to make videos about it and complain about women as a whole, judging every action of every woman to be one of harassment because of my own insecurities? That's why these kind of videos are so poorly received @EMPIRE.. the majority of the content is the videographer sneering at people for being pleasant and exchanging niceties, why should people laud that kind of behaviour? I expect that behaviour to be discouraged by women as well and i'd forgive them for taking more notice of the fewer examples of harassment than i did, because opinions are a bit selfish by nature.

And i didn't even question the validity of the supporting cast..... I'm sure Rob Bliss (OF ROB BLISS CREATIVE DOT COM EVERYBODY FAVOURITE AND LIKE PLS) would have no desire to help make this video more interesting! I quote his own philosophy here from his website, he believes in "giving people the content that they want." Interestingly worded remit... Why does no one ever question the source if it's a "reality" video? The guy practically states in his "approach" section that he aims to pander to people, he doesn't want to challenge viewer opinion...

Walloftext, sorry, but i don't like the sentiment of this video, and i will not let people in the comments tell me that i am a bad person for doing so - these are my reasons.

Would he say the same thing on a busy street to a man waking by with no interest in him?

If the answer is 'YES' then a) I can't believe he's not hoarse given the number of people one passes in a given day in NYC and b)it's not an example of gender-specific inappropriateness... but c) it's still anti-social because the body language (which men read all the time) clearly indicates a lack of interest in being stopped. These are the streets of a subdivision or Iowa City down town (don't get me wrong, I love Iowa City). Most people in New York to not greet random strangers in the street.

The exception to this is people whose jobs require approaching strangers - you know beggars, street vendors, promoters, and those guys who solicit for charity. Please notice that no one who might fall into those categories were included in the video, despite the fact that in NYC she definitely walked past all 3.

If the answer is 'NO' (IE he didn't 'greet' the disinterested camera man who walked by first but did 'greet' the disinterested woman) then the comment is both anti-social AND gender targeted. He's targeting a woman he doesn't know, when every ounce of her body language is saying that she doesn't want to be bothered. That's not friendly, that's more likely a attempt (conscious or subconscious) to exercise power over the woman walking by.

There's real performers there don't get me wrong, but it does also take a lot of luck. Not just the luck of the gene pool either.

Don't get me wrong. I'm a huge fan of the first movie, but there's something about the tone of this trailer that looks off. Yes, the puppet analogy is cool and James Spader's voice is pretty good as well. But I don't know...

Anyway, I hope the movie itself is good! I still want to see it.

I hate that fucking TV show so much.

Ozzy was always a messed up shambles, but it didn't matter, because he was Ozzy Fucking Osbourne, godfather of metal and writer of War Pigs, Paranoid, Iron Man and about a million other amazing songs. He was our* messed up shambles.

Now? He's been appropriated into wider culture, most of whom know nothing about the immense cultural contribution he's made to music.

Don't get me wrong; I'm glad he got clean and I hope he's happy with where he is, but it genuinely saddens me that he'll be remembered as that shambolic old guy who yells "Sharon!" while trying to work an over complicated TV remote.

* our = metal fans.

I'm not sure he answered the question, or at least that wasn't his focus... rather than explain why privacy matters, he stressed that we 'like' privacy. Don't get me wrong, I like it too, and I don't see that there are any overarching security or economic concerns that consistently outweigh my liking it, but it would be interesting to hear if there are arguments that more directly address why privacy matters.

As far as I could tell, he had three overarching points:

1. Privacy is culturally and psychologically valuable to us, and we suffer if we feel that this private sphere is taken away from us. This is fine, but it doesn't really tell me why privacy 'matters', just that it's an artifact of our current civilization and culture. A similar argument could be made for religion, which I don't think is a necessary but certainly a very common phenomenon.

2. Privacy allows for dissent against tyranny and corruption to grow. This, to me, seems a little fallacious - in a system of asymmetrical privacy, where your government has more privacy than you, this might be true, but in a system of very high transparency on all sides it would be very possible to effectively express and build a dissenting voice. It seems dissent is possible in both very private and very open societies, but not in societies where privacy is only granted to the state.

3. Privacy is needed for creativity and unique expressions of talent. This might be true on an individual level (though it might also be a case of overlapping with #1) but transparency and openness are also facilitators of collective creativity. It might be that we need a private creative space for traditional acts of genius, but who's to say that we can't supersede this with crowd-sourced creativity in the future?

I'm not arguing in favor of any measures to take away privacy, but it would be interesting to see some more rigorous arguments for the need for privacy. Looking at what Snowden did, for example, we see that his actions might contribute to increased privacy in the long term, but in the short term he actually removed privacy (from the government) and made the equation a little more balanced in that sense.

WHAT?!?
So, we can't beat them fighting in the middle east, but we should still go to war there to keep them from 'coming here'...exactly how does that work? By fighting an unwinnable 'war' and causing FAR more collateral damage than those we are attacking have we CREATE ISIS and it's cohorts, and give them a REASON to come to our shores. The 'came here' BECAUSE we invaded them and continue to occupy more and more and exert more and more outside control over them, not the other way around, buddy.
But don't get me wrong, now that we've created and armed them, we have a responsibility to 'deal' with them. I only wish we dealt with them by supporting the locals so much that they would rather support the US over others, rather than by bombing all of them and wondering why the survivors don't love us. That CAN'T stop terrorism, because it IS terrorism.
yeah, not too worried that ISIS might build a nuke any time soon, Iran hasn't.
When you shoot Dillinger in the head while he's handcuffed, and his dog, and burn his home with his family inside, and his neighbors homes, you will automatically create at least one Dillinger Jr., if not many. It's this dehumanizing, 'our fear outweighs your life' methodology that has created the problem where a large portion of the world hates us enough to be willing to die just to hurt or scare us, and I wish we would re-think it rather than keep doubling down and hoping for different results. It's doing the same for police lately.

I'm back!!!

Slaves? Yep
Job discrimination? Hell yeah/
Depiction of victim as criminal? You bet your goddamn arse

We done yet?

Don't get me wrong, racism, particularly against blacks, is still an issue in the US (and other parts of the world). But maybe next time read a history book or two before spouting such utter drivel.

And if you really want to get into an oppression contest...
African slavery started a few hundred years ago.
The Irish have had EIGHT HUNDRED YEARS* of oppression by the English, and I haven't even touched on the godawful misery the Jews have endured for thousands of years.

But that's a meaningless pissing contest and it only leads to idiocy.

* I am culturally obliged to write that in all caps. Sorry, it's an Irish thing.

I got the thumb url from the console list, changed the =700 to =256, went to edit video (well, update thumb in this case), clicked the "enter url" radio button, selected the http to get rid of it, and pasted in the thumb url I got earlier... then hit update.

When I get it wrong, I've usually either missed the starting http:// or else have two of them.

Since it's a mega church, by that name alone, you know they care about one thing and one thing alone.

money

(don't get me wrong, I think church has always been about power and money, mega churches are just more blatant about it)

The only problem I have here newtboy is the concept of escalation. You are obviously not in Law, so here is a bit of schooling. Ever wonder why cops use tazers on people who just passively resist (Like holding or bracing to prevent cuffs from being applied?) Or how it "takes" seven cops to "subdue" someone? It's actually practical and less violent. 1-A fun fact is that the longer a confrontation goes on for the further it escalates. By doing nothing you are letting it get further than by doing something. This means that there is a definitive time to stop trying to talk and start acting. 2-Those "escalated" methods are really lessor force than others. The more a body moves the greater the chance someone gets hurt. That means you A-Place someone on the ground as soon as possible, B-Immobilize him as prudently as possible, C-Get him in cuffs.

Don't get me wrong, abuse is abuse. But if you see a cop punching a person's ass to get him to let up on his grip, for example, that's not brutality. If you see a cop curbstomping someone, yeah, that is. Because more movement is involved.

Life is beauty through and through
Life is sunny, life is cool
Life is even easy too
But if my word is to be true
Life is something to behold
But if the truth is to be told
Let us not leave out any part
Do not fear, it's safe to say it here
You will not be called a weakling nor a fraud
For feeling the pain of the whole wide world
You want to help but can't help the feeling you cannot
And it's killing you while you're just trying to smile from your heart
So go on, say it, on the same knees you're praying
Yes, life is hard

Come celebrate
Life is hard
Come celebrate
Life is hard
Our life is all we are

Celebrate it in the sun, promenade it with everyone
Elevate it in a song
And I'll be there to play it, don't get me wrong
When I feel like dying and being gone
When life is hard
There's just one thing, let's not forget
Yes! life is it!
Life is it, life is it, it's where it's at
It's getting skinny, getting fat
It's falling deep into a love,
It's getting crushed just like a bug
Life there's no love, it's getting beat into the ground
It's getting lost and getting found,
To growing up and getting round
It's feeling silence, feeling sound
It's feeling lonely, feeling full
It's feeling oh so beautiful!
Yes!

Come celebrate
Life is hard
Come celebrate
Life is hard
Our life is all we are

Well how else are we supposed to read it? The sympathetic character looks and acts "normal", and the viewer is led to assume that he is straight, with the twist at the end being that he's gay too, albeit a kind of gay that straight people won't find threatening, i.e. just like any other average guy except for whom he dates. After this revelation, the unsympathetic, annoying, obnoxious, flamboyant gay guy turns to himself and says "I'm not oppressed: I'm just an asshole!" In other words, gay people allegedly don't experience oppression and those that feel that they do are probably just obnoxiously flamboyant, like this guy, and hence deserve any negative reaction they get.

Don't get me wrong. I'm well aware that this is just a comedy sketch, and likewise anything even approximating the flamboyant man's behavior would be completely inappropriate in the workplace. But that said, I find it deeply disturbing that the implied messaging here is "if gay people just looked and acted like straight people, except in the bedroom, no one would have any problem with them."