Isn't that a bit cruel to enslave a machine just to make it sing about freedom?

fucking things freak me out. they should be annihilated.

I think the maker is the one who should be

iRobot, it's gonna happen guys.

When the World burns I'll be outside roasting marshmallows on a deck chair.

this will happen in the future :X
http://cache.io9.com/assets/images/8...ls_rnb5wm4.jpg

If anything from a science fiction movie happens in the future I'll be very disappointed.

Not in the world burning, just how banally cliched it all is.

If ever possible, for me;

So many cybernetic enhancements. All of them.

I want photosynthetic skin.

Does he sing about freedom? Does he do weird movements with his eyes?
Then I have nothing against him

Not if he knocks on your door with a minigun saying asta la vista baby :P

and then i'll battle you on a regular basis.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=-uV1SbEuzFU
this is awesome.

Read the comments section, everyone is just about yelling at each other.

Your post reminds me of something I was thinking about the other day.

Does any one think it would be possible to drill into the earth's core out at sea to create an artificial volcano (if the core is under extreme pressure I assume lava would be pushed out) and therefore an island?

You only need to penetrate the crust,becouse the mantle is half molten and then lava might erupt but only underwater.

We should focus more on converting sea water into drinking water than creating more land. That way we could give water to people in the middle of Africa and begin to terraform our own shitty deserts before we go off to rape Mars.

Ever heard of desalinisation?


Ever heard of how it's incredibily inefficient, sucks up a shitload of electricity and is terrible to the marine environment?



We should focus more on better water recycling techniques and convincing the public that recycled water isn't as icky as they think.
I agree about the deserts though.

Yeah, I actually did completely forget about the negatives of desalinisation. On the other hand, there must be a way of fusing hydrogen and oxygen together to create water? Although I imagine that again, that isn't viable for the west, however, in the African deserts, where they actually need the water, we could surely hook up the devices required to make water up to enormous solar panel farms?

I see a niche in the market here...

Where are you getting the hydrogen and oxygen from? How are you processing it?

Yes, what Phylum said. If we could get a cheap and reliable supply of hydrogen, we'd actually solve our energy issues far sooner than we solve water supply as fuel cells are a useful technology. Right now the only way to get large amounts of hydrogen is to use vast amounts of electricity to split the H2 from the O.

Shame there's no way of stealing it from the Sun. In fairness, hydrogen is supposedly the most readily available atom in the Universe because it's so basic for example, after hydrogen burns out in a star, it relies on energy produced from helium which came from the extreme temperatures or something, then you basically go down the periodic table...I think that's how it works, I haven't done Physics for a year now.

Isn't the problem that Hydrogen is the simplest element in the universe?

Because, you know, everything wants to bond with it because it's so damn simple?

I think that's how it works, I haven't done physics for six years.

You're probably right, either I trawl through physics books now, or we wait for BM's science senses.

Isn't that Chemistry?

But yes. Hydrogen is nothing more than a proton with an electron bound to it. It's not hard for most elements to cram that electron in somewhere.

I haven't done Chemistry for six years either.

you haven't done my mother for six years.

Is that what she tells you?

It's supposed to be their mother. You're doing it wrong!

Do you just really hate your mother or something?

i love my mother more than a nice, long piss on a Sunday afternoon. i just want to be cutting edge.

why, do you want to book a slot with my mother? because i can arrange that. you know, if you want to. no problem. just throwing that out there. think about it.

make sure you get back to me.

i have no idea where i'm going with this, i'm just going with the flow. god forbid my mother actually see this.

I don't think it's going anywhere, so stop. Or don't, I'm not gonna tell you how to live maaaan. ;D

You know who else isn't going anywhere? MA's mother.

You should drop in and say hi.

I’ll put a book in her slot

If you kids are quite done.

the reason Hydrogen is so reactive is that, like metals, a hydrogen atom needs to gain an electron to complete it's outermost shell. And since that shell is the innermost one possible, it is closest to the nucleus, which is positively charged and thus attracts the negatively charged electrons. the close proximity makes the attraction strong and thus easily fulfilled. This reactivity accounts for it's rarity in a pure form on Earth, but since it's pure form is the lightest gas it has the same difficulty as Helium: it is too light to be effectively held by Earth's gravity and is therefore easily lost into space. What little remains in that form during the journey, anyway. Helium is the second most common element in the universe, but our entire supply comes from reduced alpha particles emitted by alpha decay of radioactive elements inside the Earth. I'll leave someone else to comment on our obscene squandering of this industrially useful commodity.

Actually, Helium atoms are very stable for the same reason that Hydrogen atoms are very reactive: the closest electron shell to the nucleus is filled, thus to form compounds it would have to either share one or both electrons with another atom (expanding their orbits against the electromagnetic force that binds them) or become an ion by losing one or both entirely, which is very difficult. I suppose it could also gain one in the next shell up, but that is not a very tenable state at all. I only know of two Helium compounds. One is Helium Hydride, HeH+, and it is formed when a Tritium atom (Hydrogen-3) in either T2 or HT decays by beta decay into Helium-3 and the molecule remains bound together. It is the strongest known acid (though it is so powerful that it could not be prepared because it would react with the water, though it is possible to calculate what it's aqueous acidity would be). the other compound is HeH2. Both have been identified by mass spectrometry in space, such as the atmospheres of white dwarf stars.

Obviously I've ignored the effects of quantum physics in these explanations.


I'm intrigued by this. Can this sentence not be simplified: "if we had a cheap and reliable source of fuel we could solve our energy issues"? It's not exactly revelatory, is it?

I, for one, want to see a way to reenflate the bubbles on bubble wrap.

You know, an explaination actually clarifies very little if no-one understands it...

I understood about 2/5ths of that one. New record.

We also recommend 'Will I die if I eat polar bear liver?'

Truly a reputable academic archive.

i really, genuinely hope my mother doesn't know about this place.

also something to do with future technology involving chainsaws.

Well, obviously. But we were talking about Hydrogen at the time.

Besides, the other advantage of Hydrogen that I forgot to mention in that post was that it's not a pollutant, though our current methods of manufacturing Hydrogen are pretty bad for the environment.