SallyF has a point. Well, several, but I'll leave the recreational habits of the current president to her; I understand that he only smokes cigarettes now. But as far as investment initiatives, who is getting what money? Are these firms marketing a valuable property that is just on the cusp of success, needing only a helping hand? Or is the money going to go, with much fanfare, into yet another government-subsidized sinkhole, like windmill farms or solar energy farms covering areas the size of Europe? Or minority fronted companies actually run by the good old boys? Maybe we'll have special e-book readers for feminists. Goofier things happen. For that matter, why are these initiatives needed at all? There's venture capital out there for good ideas: you know the drill: build a better mousetrap and the world will beat a path to your door. I am waiting, without holding my breath, to see what unfolds here.
What a joke. IBM's money is scheduled to go to 3 companies that would not need a handout from IBM if their products were worth anything. Obama wrote in his autobiography that he spent his college years snorting cocaine, so as an unindicted felon, it is ironic that so many are fawning over his ridiculous attempts to appear serious. Is this affirmative action?
Drones are, in essence, flying autonomous vehicles. Pros and cons surrounding drones today might well foreshadow the debate over the development of self-driving cars. In the context of a strongly regulated aviation industry, "self-flying" drones pose a fresh challenge. How safe is it to fly drones in different environments? Should drones be required for visual line of sight – as are piloted airplanes? Join EE Times' Junko Yoshida as she moderates a panel of drone experts.