Sunday, January 25, 2015

Theoretical Physics gets too much credit...

It wasn't too long ago, on a political forum/page (of all places), that some clown introduced theoretical physics into a debate about socialism. Yeah, your guess is as good as mine, but somehow or another, they were trying to prove that Einstein wasn't right for being a socialist? Honestly, I don't even get into politics very often, nor do I even know what a socialist even is. In fact, I shy from political debates more than I would a religious debate, any day of the week. However, when somebody says that so-in-so is an expert in "theoretical physics," what are you really saying? Oh, I get it, you forgot what it means to play with numbers/math and currently trending scientific theories to dream up anything you want, while being under the title of a "theoretical physicist."

True, the common definition for this math-magical career is a branch of physics which employs mathematical models and abstractions of physical objects and systems to rationalize, explain and predict natural phenomena. Of course, this odd career is definitely in contrast with more realistic stuff like "experimental physics," just saying. In a thumbnail, they rely on mainstream theories and mathematics to add to, just like many folks have, an existing imagination. What's the big deal here? Do they not get too much credit or what? I mean seriously, the French Fry guy at McDonald's can take a few hits of LSD and say things that often relate to quantum mechanics. Lets just say, that even most Buddhists speak of things that at least semi-relate to the theory of quantum entanglement and I really doubt that most of them spent years in college studying silly theories of our existence, for example.

I also find it funny, that during, yet another trending theory called the "string theory," that they have to add a certain amount of dimensions for the math to work. What? Are you telling me that we must have 11 dimensions (or whatever they say now) just so your math can work on paper just so you can complete your totally non-provable theory, and I suppose to take you seriously? Good grief, just because the History Channel or some science website airs your baloney, doesn't mean that I should succumb to your asininity, right? In fact, I think some of these chaps that think they are brainstorming cosmic scenarios while fictitiously claiming to have a divine/scientific epiphany during the process, would be much more credit-worthy if they just dropped the mathematics and currently trending theories, and do more like the local bum down the road does, after a few hits of something that he smokes, drinks, takes, or whatever. At least it will be more genuine... Ha!

In conclusion, does having those extra letters, names & titles beside your name, really mean anything - when you are claiming to unravel the properties of the universe during the process? I think not... LOL!

Image Credit: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theoretical_physics

---End of Post "Theoretical Physics gets too much credit..."

Mind Uploading & Cybernetics

To many folks, the concept behind 'mind uploading' is definitely a far-fetched notion. I once posted this subject within a Q & A section on another website and received a very limited amount of responses, to say the least. You will usually have 3 different camps for this query: 1) You will have the spiritual group that is against this idea because the body is like a vessel for our consciousness, soul, and whatnot. 2) You will have the proponents of cybernetics that claim mind uploading and/or downloading a complete mind into a machine will be possible in the distant future. 3) You will always have the good ol' "I couldn't care less" people.

I'm not even going to try and define the term cybernetics, but mainly because cybernetics can't even define cybernetics. LOL! Seriously, there are currently 13+ definitions for that term on Wikipedia, for example.

I don't know if this is true or not, but I once had a person tell me that current science predicts this technology will emerge around 2065. He went on to mention about how we are just a bunch of chemicals and electrical impulses (haven't we all heard that before) that could easily be replicated into a computer. Ha-ha! Personally, I really doubt if they will ever create a sentient robot that replicates an emotional, semi-rational human being with common sense and imagination.

Brain Emulation / Mind Uploading is a hypothetical process that states the mind transfer will involve copying a conscious mind to a non-biological system or computational device. Some people really have a lot of faith in this, but do you think it is possible? I mean, Microsoft can't even make their computer devices glitch free, so how in the hell are the scientists going to create a cyborg, sentient robot, etc., via cybernetics that absolutely mimics a human being without any errors? Ha-ha!

Related Post: 

Human performs the Vulcan Mind-meld on Rat


Well, I just read some interesting science news. I can't really say much at the moment, other than the fact that I'm never surprised anymore with how much money is wasted on certain senseless research and scientific projects. Nonetheless, this one is sure to bring out the science-fiction buffs. I like the original series Star Trek, and anybody that knows very much about that series will be familiar with Spock and the Vulcan mind-meld. You know, it is where he puts his hand on the other person's head and reads their thoughts. Yeah, sort of like 2nd stage telepathy... If you need a refreshment for what the Vulcan mind-meld is, visit: en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Vulcan_mind_meld

Anyway, a group of researchers at Harvard University have created the first noninvasive brain-to-brain interface between a human and, uh, a rat. While reading about this crazed project, they said that by thinking the appropriate thought, the BBI allows the human to control the rat’s tail. Wow! Such a breakthrough! LOL!
At any insane rate, before you comment on this post, you may want to first check out this story in full detail, here: www.extremetech.com/extreme/162678-harvard-creates-brain-to-brain-interface-allows-humans-to-control-other-animals-with-thoughts-alone

Is that nuts or what? If this type of stuff succeeds and/or advances to a much higher stage of progress, can you imagine what uses it could have if there was human to human action taking place? Yeah, there could definitely be ethical issues here, to say the least. At any rate, I wonder how much money it cost to hook up all that fancy equipment and test over and over while trying to get a human to pervade a rat's brain. At least the study involved an intelligent species, which was the rat, by the way. Ha! Just kidding, well, I think...
Feel free to share your thoughts...

Image Credit: Wikipedia (public domain)

---End of Post "Human performs the Vulcan Mind-meld on Rat"

Indie Book Publishing




I was recently talking to somebody online within a comment section, and Indie Book Publishing was brought up. The comment field was full of hilarity and utter garbage, but that is besides the point. This particular individual follows a pseudo-scientific belief system that is rejected by the scientific community. However, to prove that anybody can write a book now and sell it on Amazon, he used the Indie publishing option. If you are wondering, Indie is short for 'independence' or 'independent'... This option is good if you want to skip all the steps and waiting that people have to endure when publishing a book the traditional way.

A person could wait their entire life for some big lump sum from a major publisher, and the Indie Book Publishing method can help get your content into the marketplace so there will be a much better chance you will gain a following, readers, etc. Personally, I've never even thought about publishing a book, but I have heard about the rejections people often get when submitting their work to professional publishing companies. Actually, after reading some of the small samples from a few of them, I can see why; ha-ha!

Anyway, I'm not an affiliate with any publishing company, but if you'd like to read more about this subject, go here: www.findyourpublisher.com/indie_book_publishing/ [Link is no longer active]

E-books sell for really cheap nowadays, thanks to the Kindle and whatever else they have now. I'm not sure what would be your best route, but it does seem that hardback books are slowly becoming a thing of the past. At any literary rate, I just thought I'd provide this resource link, in case anybody was curious about additional options for becoming a published author (I'm not talking about a blogger, etc.).

Image Credit: bookcovers.creativindie.com/3-in-1-ebook-conversion-and-formatting-package-kindle-epub-and-smashwords/

---End of Post "Indie Book Publishing"

Artwork: Ancient Egyptian Tablets


Of course, these are not actual Ancient Egyptian tablets from long ago, but they are pieces of artwork. I bought these several years ago. They really go nice with other Egyptian collectibles of mine, as well as the stones and crystals I have collected over the years.

These particular tablets are fairly heavy for their size and, although I know they are fabricated in today's time period, they still appear to be made from rock or stone at first glance. Well, if I were to hit you in the head with 'em, you would feel as if you got hit with a piece of brick; ha!

Anyway, this got me to thinking, since I used to be pretty big into artwork. So, I checked online and they do sell Egyptian Hieroglyphic Stone kits. The site I'm about to link to, claims that these are crafts for kids. Hell, I'm not a kid anymore and I still thought they were cool. LOL! The basic concept behind it, is that kids can make their own stone tablet using self-hardening dough or clay and carve out hieroglyphs onto it. Anyway, you can find that stuff, here: www.firstpalette.com/Craft_themes/People/hieroglyphic_stone/hieroglyphic_stone.html

Or, you can just do like I did, and buy the Ancient Egyptian tablets online, all professional and whatnot. Ha!


Image Credit: My own photos.

---End of Post "Artwork: Ancient Egyptian Tablets"

Automatic Fishing Reel / Yo-Yo

This is an interesting little gadget for the lazy fisherman; ha! This automatic fishing reel supposed to be great for bank fishing or if you are fishing from a boat, kayak, dock, ice or even a jug. After you bait this thing up, tie it around a tree or anchor it to whatever surrounds you and go on with your business. Hey, who said fishing required you to actually do the fishing? LOL! The automatic reel supposed to hold the fish after it is hooked. I think it even reels the fish in several feet, going by some of the reviews. Speaking of that, this little device surprisingly had good reviews. I assumed it was some cheap automatic fishing reel (some people call it a "Fishing Yo-Yo"), but since it costs over 30 dollars, maybe not.

It was amusing to read some of its other uses, too, such as: it can be used as a clothesline, duck decoy retriever, small animal snare, and so on. This may be a good addition to your camping supplies, bait/tackle boxes, survival kits and whatnot. Plus, it might be a great gift idea if you have a lot of hard-to-shop-for redneck friends; ha! Oh, one of the reviews mentioned that you may need to bring some extra rope, if you have to secure this item around a limb or tree. Anyway, I thought I'd share this cool product today; cheers!

Shopping Link:  "Automatic Fishing Reel"


Image Credit: Fair Use - Product Image - Amazon.com - This image is found in various catalogs and websites.

---End of Post "Automatic Fishing Reel / Yo-Yo"

Have you ever thought about a Digital Detox?

When I hear the word 'detox', I normally think of people getting off of drugs and/or alcohol. I also think about those people that go through periodic "cleanses" and try to flush their system out while drinking lots of water, eating fruits, etc. However, when I hear the phrase "digital detox," I can't help but laugh. I mean, there really is a lot of people out there that are addicted to their cell phones and/or electronic devices. My main electronic addiction is this glowing contraption I'm staring at right now (my desktop computer), but can you imagine how free you'd feel if you went on a digital detox?

We live in a techno world, when concerning most non-tribal areas of the world, etc. So, I understand that going through a digital detox would be really hard unless you either got thrown into the jungle, stayed in the middle of a desert or inside of a cave, and so on. I mean, even the Penguins in Antarctica have laptops; ha! Anyway, I happened to think of this, when I heard some girl on TV telling this other lady about her cell phone addiction and how she needs to go on a digital detox. I then looked it up online to see how many folks have wrote about this, and CNN had an article about some Yoga company that offers these services. You can find that page, here: www.cnn.com/2012/11/29/travel/digital-detox/

It was sort of funny, watching people doing yoga while trying to go "cold turkey" from their mindless gadgets. LOL! How about you? Have you ever thought about a digital detox? Personally, since I don't watch much television and my main source of electric entertainment is the computer, I'll pass on this type of detox. But, I must say, when I was a kid I either stayed in the woods or at the creeks or out in the yard, and I had so much fun all the time. So really, when I think about this, it doesn't sound like a bad idea...

Image Credit: [Link is no longer active]

---End of Post "Have you ever thought about a Digital Detox?"

Monday, January 19, 2015

New Throwaway / Peel-Away Bed Sheets

Side Note:  I originally wrote this post 11 months ago, February 21, 2014, on another blogging site.

Yes folks, there is a new product line coming out for the lazy, oops, I mean for the ones that can't be bothered with washing their bed sheets. It is a 7-layer throwaway product, better described as the peel-away sheets. "Just peel off the ew and sleep in the new" is the tag line of AfreSHeet. If you'd like to read from the source, go here: http://www.elledecor.com/shopping/home-accessories/news/a6230/peel-away-sheets/

I wouldn't hardly call this an invention, but they seem to think that the hassle of changing your bed sheets is especially troublesome for college students, etc. These particular throwaway fabric sheets have a waterproof coating to preserve underneath layers, and they did mention that the material is recyclable. Ha! I really wonder how many people are going to rush to the nearest recycling bin after they get done peeling off a new layer?

Some people may think this is a fantastic idea, but I just don't get it. Washing the sheets on your bed isn't like some daunting task. The washer and dryer does most of the work, and all you do is pull 'em off and then put them back on after they dry. Is the traditional method too much work? With this new peel-away product, you can be lazy 7 consecutive times before having to buy more throwaway bed sheets. Wow! The only break-through I see here is the marketing savvy; promote laziness and make big financial gains from it! I would never buy this crap!

---End of Post "New Throwaway / Peel-Away Bed Sheets"

Sunday, January 18, 2015

Bruce Lee Movies & Title Confusion

Well, this has been amusing... I have been trying to sort out some of the title confusion concerning Bruce Lee movies, and it was somewhat entertaining to read a few blog posts on the glorious Inter~webs that obviously didn't know the difference from Bruce Lee and Bruce Li. I say that because some clown, for example, constructed a blog post entitled "Bruce Lee's Top 10 Movies." LOL! This is hilarious, especially considering he only made 5 movies! The other 5 that were listed were not even his films nor was he even in the shoddy flicks. A couple of them were just those cheap attempts from the '80s where they would use random Bruce Lee clips during a film to fill in some blanks while having a so-called look-alike character playing the main role. To make matters worse, the look-alike didn't look anything like Bruce Lee; ha!

As for the title confusion, some of this is understandable. His first movie was called "The Big Boss" and "Fists of Fury." His 2nd film was called "The Chinese Connection" and "Fist of Fury" and "The Iron Hand." His 3rd film was called "Return of the Dragon" and "Way of the Dragon." That is the one where he fought Chuck Norris. They did get his 4th film correct, as it was entitled "Enter the Dragon." That was by far his most popular movie. Bruce Lee never finished the 5th movie he was working on, since he died, but he did get a lot of the fight scenes done. They later pieced it together and made a movie out of it called "Game of Death." That was the one where he fought Kareem Abdul-Jabbar.

Here is a quote from Wikipedia, to show how some of the confusion started: "When The Big Boss was being prepared for American distribution, it was to be retitled The Chinese Connection. The title of Lee's second film, Fist of Fury, was to be identical, except for being Fists of Fury. However, the titles were accidentally reversed. The Big Boss was released as Fists of Fury and Fist of Fury became The Chinese Connection." You can read more about that, here: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Big_Boss

Anyway, is this nuts or what? I was going to describe in more detail about his 5 martial arts flicks, but after reading about all of this title confusion, I think I'm now confused... Ha-ha!

Image Credit: My own photo.

---End of Post "Bruce Lee Movies & Title Confusion"

Frequent dentist visits can cause more harm than good?

Personally, I've always thought that the standard bi-annual visits to the dentist is not only a waste of time and money, but could also cause more harm than good. Even though many people think it's best to see your dentist every 6 months, I disagree for a few reasons. Of course, going to the dentist can be a great thing when you are having problems or just need a good oral checkup, but that's not what this post is about. I've seen way too many people end up with several cavities that brushed all the time and went to the dentist at least twice a year. All of those ultrasonic tools and metal scrapers can't be good, when used in a frequent fashion to remove plague, tartar, etc. In fact, I'm pretty sure that they actually create tooth decay/cavities/caries in some cases.

I do understand that genetics also plays a big role in this, along with certain types of medications, and so on. The food & drinks we consume can definitely have a major impact, as well. For the most part, if you eat right and brush your teeth every day, you should rarely have to go to the dentist, in my opinion. I also don't like how they constantly radiate people with oral x-rays any chance they can get during their bi-annual visits. Sure, a few here and there may not be so bad, but I wouldn't want to increase the risk of having thyroid problems either, as it is well established that radiation and your thyroid doesn't mix very well. If you feel the need, ask for the thyroid guard when receiving oral x-rays. I'm not talking about the vest thingy they often use; I mean the separate one that goes over your neck.

Anyway, I just thought I'd bring this up. Personally, I try to stay away from those crazy dentists! Ha! If I can go a few decades without seeing one, that's fine with me! So, what do you think? Is there anybody else out there that thinks frequent dentist visits can cause more harm than good?

Abusive and sadistic dentist photo credit: www.movievortex.com/feature/dental-disasters/ [URL is no longer valid]

---End of Post "Frequent dentist visits can cause more harm than good?"

Saturday, January 17, 2015

Robotic Gas Pumps?

"Domo arigato, Mr. Roboto, mata o hima de; Domo arigato, Mr. Roboto, himitsu wo shiri tai. Thank you very much, oh Mr. Roboto!" Those were snippets from an old song that sort of relates to this post... LOL!

Anyway, I'm not that impressed with the technology for Robotic Gas Pumps, but I'm sure that some of y'all may like this idea. Before self-serve gas became commonplace, drivers used to pull up to the gas pump back in the day, and an attendant would fill your vehicle's fuel tank to whatever desired amount you asked for. In the future, this notion may once again be widespread, except the attendant will be some metallic, robotic arm. Yikes!

They are already pushing harder than ever for self-driving robotic cars and whatnot. There again, I'm not impressed with that idea, either. I understand that a fair percentage of Homo sapiens would be pleased if everything became automated. I will go out on a limb and say that most sentient human beings would still prefer to eat, drink, sleep and wipe their own ass on their own, but who knows? Ha-ha! What do you think about this?

Anyway, the YouTube video for these robotic gas pumps is located here: www.youtube.com/watch?v=0bZ2u5UnApA

---End of Post: Robotic Gas Pumps?

Sci-Fi Style Car - ETV

I just read a short article about some new custom-made, sci-fi style car that was called an ETV. Well, we got RVs, SUVs, and automobiles with TVs, so why not add ETV into the mix? They call it that because it stands for "Extra Terrestrial Vehicle." I was hoping that I'd be impressed, but all expectations fell short when I seen the pictures, watched the test-drive video, and read about the massive price tag this car has. This space-age vehicle suppose to be some type of conglomeration from multiple vehicles, going by what the custom builder Mike Vetter said. Well, to me, it definitely looks like a conglomeration alright, one that unites a bunch of space turds and random chunks of delicate alloys; ha-ha!

Sure, it has 270 horsepower with a tiny supercharged 2.2-liter four-cylinder engine that supposed to get close to 26 miles per gallon, but that's definitely not worth $100,000 dollars to me! Plus, the thing is a manual. I prefer an automatic because, well, I prefer an automatic. But the wrongness doesn't stop here, when concerning this outrageous price tag. The thing is so low to the ground, it would probably get stuck on freakin' speed bumps and encounter damage from little rocks in the road. During the video, it seemed to bottom-out while making a simple turn. Say what? I'd hate to be in this vehicle if I had to drive on back-wooded country roads. Plus, who is going to help you when you get stuck, while driving that? I can see a group of rednecks driving by laughing, throwing beers cans at the vehicle and yelling out: "Ha, ha! Look at the little rich space boy all stuck in the ditch with his sissy ETV!" Either way, some of y'all may like that car, but it is not for me!

Image Credit: I cropped the image from autos.yahoo.com/blogs/motoramic/america-oddest-sci-fi-custom-land-driveway-price-220752465.html

---End of Post "Sci-Fi Style Car - ETV"

Can you imagine a society full of flying cars?

Can you imagine that?
With the potential drivers I see out there, this is hard to fathom for me, when concerning a society full of flying cars. The actual idea of flying cars is not that far-fetched, as we already have models that do just that, albeit they are not very impressive. I mean, cars with big wheels that look like airplanes with retractable wings, is hardly what I'd call a flying car.

Plus, we must raise money for each city that has these levitating contraptions for this to be possible, so we'll definitely need "flying cops" so they can fly us some tickets for our traffic violations, right? I'm still thinking of all the idiot drivers I see on the road today, as it would be horrific to see them in the air; ha-ha! My gawd! On second thought, this is not a good idea... If you have collisions in the air, you do realize that they will have to land somewhere, right? Well, I guess the house insurance rates will be one of the first things to go up after a few crash-landings occur from airborne lunatic drivers, I suppose. What about drunk drivers? Instead of a DUI will it be called an FUI (flying under the influence)? Anyway, I attached an image of the flying DeLorean from the movie "Back to the Future: Part 2."

Image Credit: mundane-blog.blogspot.com/2011/10/flying-cars-in-future.html

---End of Post "Can you imagine a society full of flying cars?"

Should Car Insurance be a Law?

This is actually a highly debatable topic, and I can definitely see both sides to the argument, but I'll get to that in a minute. Anyway, I was online searching what other people thought about this subject, and it is definitely heated - to say the least! This popped into my enlarged head earlier, when I was checking my PayPal balance this morning, and noticed that it was almost equivalent to my 6 month Liability Insurance bill for my freakin' ride - that is due next week! Yeah, I can't wait to celebrate my recent online earnings by way of buying more car insurance... Hurray! Hurrah! If I ever get my flying saucer fixed, they can forget about it; ha!

Now, back to the main subject... In a way, I don't think it should be mandatory or a law that states that you have to buy car insurance or else. I've had my parked car hit before by a person that didn't have insurance, and my insurance paid for my ride (I had full coverage, at the time). They just took it out of her ass, most likely. Either way, her lack of responsibility didn't affect me. The problems start if, using this example, she didn't have any insurance and I only had liability insurance to cover the other people/property damage, etc. What would I have done? I mean, she might not have liked my idea of compensation for my damaged vehicle, nor would she have most likely offered to pay for it out-of-pocket. Things could have got ugly.

On the other hand, if everybody was made to have, at the very minimum, Liability Insurance, we wouldn't have these problems. Another example in favor of why it shouldn't be a law, is if somebody lives extremely close to work, only drives direct trips in a small town with minor traffic, and needs to skip a few months on Insurance because they simply can't afford it and are living check-by-check. I know, that is a sad excuse, but it does seem odd that a human being couldn't "risk it" if they needed to. Sometimes people have to take chances.

In my state, there is a Law that requires everybody to have insurance to be road legal. To me, something just doesn't feel right about it, but like I said before, I can see both sides. I'm curious how many of y'all feel about this issue. Personally, I'm going to moan and groan and pay my damn liability car insurance next week, and hope I don't ever have to use it!

---End of Post "Should Car Insurance be a Law?"

There should not be a Seat Belt Law for Adult Drivers...

In my opinion, this is one of the most asinine, money-making driving laws known to man! Sure, one could say: "Seat belt tickets don't cost much; they care about your life, so you need to buckle up so you don't die in a wreck." LOL! What a load... For one, the seat belt law allows "officers" to pull you over for no apparent reason, hoping that they can fine/bill your wallet to death while making them look like super heroes bringing in money for their town. Speaking of that, maybe this is a small town thing, where there isn't much crime... Yeah, the seat belt saved my life going 22 miles per hour through town, but thanks for pulling me over so you could search my vehicle in hopes to find an old beer can I drank while installing my stereo 3 months ago! Yeah, there is no marijuana in my cigarette pack, so why are you looking in there for my seat belt violation? Ha!

Anyway, I have been pulled over so many times for a seat belt, that it isn't even funny. Out of those 17 times getting pulled over for a seat belt violation, I have only had 2 tickets for it, and one of those was dropped. However, I was searched thoroughly multiple times, including my vehicle and "no officer, that is not a gun, it just grew that way!" At any criminal rate, I could tell you so many ludicrous situations that involved the "I care about your safety crap," but I refuse to do so. I have even been pulled over before, during the middle of the night on a dark road, while the officer said, after searching my entire ride: "Well, it didn't appear you had your seat belt on, is why I pulled you over." Really? You can see in the dark on a backstreet without street lights soooo good, that you could tell that I didn't have my seat belt on even though I was already wearing it?" Simply amazing, I tell ya...

I can definitely see having a seat belt law for babies, small kids and young adults/teenagers, but not for grown adults 18+. It is fairly obvious to me that the "buckle up for safety thing" is one giant load of steaming dung, as it just adds leverage to the reasons to pull people over for no reason. The proof is in the pudding and I've seen it way too many times. Plus, are you that naïve that you actually believe that some group of random judicial strangers cares about your crazy adult life while driving down the road? Ha! Yeah, you'd find more love on the Jerry Springer show... Anyway, make sure you buckle up to TRY and avoid getting pulled over for no reason or, I mean, for safety, right?

Image Credit: www.simonattorneys.com

---End of Post "There should not be a Seat Belt Law for Adult Drivers..."

V2V: Vehicle-to-Vehicle Technology



Now here is an upcoming technology that really steps it up a notch. It is called V2V and/or vehicle-to-vehicle technology. It is where all the new cars/trucks/SUVs being manufactured could be equipped with a device(s) and/or gear that will enable it to talk to other vehicles on the road to reduce vehicular crashes and to help motorists avoid traffic jams. WTF? Is this really necessary?

I'm not even a fan of the autonomous vehicles (self-driving cars), but the V2V technology will most likely play an important role in such things. However, a lot of newer models have already increased their safety levels, as stated here: "A growing number of cars and trucks are already fitted with forward collision warning systems, lane departure systems and other technologies that can alert a driver to a potential collision. Some vehicles can even apply brakes automatically if the driver doesn't respond quickly enough." To read more about this, go here: editorial.autos.msn.com/feds-want-vehicles-to-talk-to-one-another?icid=autos_5261 [link is no longer active]

Interestingly enough, a recent poll said that 9 out of 10 Americans would be very worried or deeply concerned about driving in an automatic self-driving vehicle. About 35% said that this type of technology also makes them leery about privacy issues and whatnot. When it comes to privacy, it wasn't just about the government, either. Insurance companies could also track where and how you drive, so I'd imagine that they could adjust your insurance rates/payments accordingly; yikes!

All in all, I just don't like this idea. I'm so glad that I prefer older vehicles with primitive technology. When I want high-tech travel, I just hop into my spaceship; ha!

Image Credit:  http://www.industryleadersmagazine.com/connect-vehicle-technology-to-prevent-vehicle-crashes/

---End of Post "V2V: Vehicle-to-Vehicle Technology"

Norton Anti-Virus Price vs. McAfee [vs. AVG]

Well, I've had the Norton Anti-Virus software protection package for several years on my computer, but I finally had to drop them a few days ago. The sole reason was because it just flat out costs too much money for my liking. For some reason, although I had the auto-renew feature activated and paid it every year, the price slowly went up all the time and/or basically each year.
The last year I somehow got enrolled into Norton One protection, whatever the big whoop is there. Anyway, regular price is nearly 150 bucks, but the sale price is about 100 dollars and it covers multiple devices, computers and other crap I don't need. I cancelled them.
So, to make a short story even shorter, I went to the McAfee Anti-Virus website and got a plan for one computer for 25 dollars. I only visit so many websites anyway, and figured it was worth saving 75 dollars! Is it any better or worse than Norton? I have no idea. As long as it covers Viruses and Malware, Trojans, etc., I'm fine with paying a lower price. If you know of any better deals for anti-virus protection, feel free to clue me in; cheers!

Side Note:  This short post was originally posted elsewhere and within the comment field it garnered several comments.  Some of those comments mentioned that there were several sites online that offered free Anti-Virus protection.  Dang, next year I may drop McAfee, even though it was way more affordable than Norton, and be on the lookout for some free stuff; ha!

Image Credit: AVG Anti-Virus Internet Security 2015 product image using the 'free to use & share' function via the Bing search engine.

---End of Post "Norton Anti-Virus Price vs. McAfee"

Fukushima's Radioactive Ocean Water: Hyped Up or Real Threat?

 Original Post Date: February 25, 2014

There has been a lot of talk on the Internet about Fukushima's radioactive ocean water during the last several months, yet many of the so-called experts are yet to throw in the red flag or the caution signs as they all seem to think that it's still safe. Is this all getting hyped up by the Internet or is it a real threat? As most of you should know, tons and tons of radiation leaked into the Pacific Ocean a while back due to Japan's leaking Fukushima nuclear power plant. As a reminder, I just read that it has now reached waters off the shore of Canada, as stated here: local.msn.com/fukushimas-radioactive-ocean-water-arrives-at-west-coast [link is no longer active]

Does anybody want to stock up on tuna fish and any other type of seafood from the Pacific before it's too late? Well, I must say, regardless of the fact that high doses of radiation is never good for the human body - especially your thyroid gland - I can't rule out the hype. I've seen so much crap explode and propagate online that was so far from the truth, it wasn't even funny. Since we are obviously dealing with radioactive ocean water, the question still remains: Will the Pacific Ocean be big enough to dilute this crap? Experts continue to say yes, but I'll be fair and provide a couple YouTube links that don't seem to think so, then another one that involves the fish constantly being checked, yet they haven't had a radioactive seafood problem as of now.

* www.youtube.com/watch?v=QEraoeS7iBo [link is no longer active]
* www.youtube.com/watch?v=3l8TT1dv-PM
* www.youtube.com/watch?v=jHoFSXh9Ejk

As of now, the ones that are supposedly 'in the know' are saying that the radiation levels will be too low in the ocean to have any real negative impact on human health, but who do you believe? The hype or the threats?

Side Note: South Korea has recently become the first country to ban Japanese fish and seafood imports!

---End of Post "Fukushima's Radioactive Ocean Water: Hyped Up or Real Threat?"