I'm sure that's just an extreme example to grab attention. The reality would be port-hole sized OLED screens, a drop-in replacement for current windows, but perhaps more conveniently located.

A few problems I see...

In an emergency, the power goes out and passengers can't see anything, like how far they are from the ground, if it's safe to open the emergency exit, etc. Neither can the cabin crew look out to see if the engine is on fire or fell off the wing.

Electronic screens don't mimic a window, properly... They can't imitate both the gentle diffuse and polarized light reflecting off an object, and the harsh non-polarized light of the sun, or reflective (eg. chrome) parts. Similarly, if they look pretty good during the day, they'll be much too bright at night, or vise-versa. Also, with a real window you can rise above it and look down to see the ground, go below it and look up to see the stars, as well as looking straight out to see horizontally... The picture on OLED screens won't change as you move, so you'll see only a fraction as much, and the picture not moving as you do, will ruin the illusion, and perhaps that fake motion could trigger motion sickness.

Cameras don't do well in direct sunlight, low-light conditions, etc. And when there's rain or just moisture, and the tiny camera lens is the first thing to fog up giving you a garbled wall?

On the plus-side, the ability to put (small) windows anywhere and everywhere, including above your head, would give people a much nicer view. Also, it could make "flying wing" concept planes, which are far safer and estimated at 30% cheaper to operate, with the only problem being that people want windows, would suddenly become viable as passenger craft.

WARNING: NSFW

Not the article, but some of the sidebar photos... Remind me never to visit oddee again.

Punishment for bad behavior simply has to be immediate and direct for a cat to understand it. WHILE your cat is scratching the furniture, a smack on the nose will stop them, and tell them not to do that... You may have to do this multiple times, too. Cats don't understand abstract anger after the fact, like dogs can, and they aren't as eager to please you and learn the rules as dogs are. Punishment also has to be light and reserved for really bad behaviors (namely, clawing), not just when they fail to do something good you wanted.

And like the article says, you've got to provide acceptable alternatives for the cat... They need toys, places they are allowed to scratch, windows they can look out and possibly sleep in-front of, things to climb, and plenty of comfortable locations they can hide under or jump-up onto. It drives me crazy when people want a cat (or dog) that doesn't jump onto the furniture, doesn't scratch anything at all, doesn't need to have any unsightly toys, or otherwise disturb their sparse and perfectly sterile world. Those people really want a cat (or dog) figurine instead of the real thing... or maybe a roomba.

My cats are very well behaved, but it takes a long, long time (years) to gradually break bad habits entirely. Though you will see signs of improvement long before then. A big part of that is teaching them that they can always trust and depend on you. If you're inconsistent, or you ever trick or unpleasantly surprise them, you can forget about ever getting belly-rubbing privileges.

Forensic science TODAY is hardly any better than "spectral evidence".

Fingerprints aren't unique. DNA has many false-positives from the improper way law-enforcement tries to use it. Anybody and everybody can claim to be an expert witness with no vetting from the court. Blood spatter analysis, footwear impressions and bite-mark comparisons have zero basis in science. Coroners are political appointees who don't need any medical credentials. There's no science behind, or training for, arson investigators. etc., etc.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/tech/forensics-on-trial.html

http://www8.nationalacademies.org/onpinews/newsitem.aspx?RecordID=12589

Cameron: "Plus, frankly, I wasn’t interested in an African-American man chasing around a white girl with a knife."

"Sorry, I already gave at the office..."

$40? And yet when the blood bank is low, they can't do any better than begging, nagging, and guilting people into coming in?

I don't consider it a charitable donation when some doctor is going make a tidy profit charging thousands of dollars to someone for the pint of blood I gave them for free.

No love for Spaceballs, Who's Harry Crumb?, Canadian Bacon, Stripes, etc.? I'd rate all of them, including Uncle Buck, above Planes...

Most cable channels start with a handful of content on an endless loop. Then they slowly expand their catalog.

I remember AMC was playing Chain Reaction (1996) 4 times a day at one point back in the late 90s. Now they're barely even showing movies (the "M" in their name) and they've sucked the profits from all other basic-cable channels and dominate ratings.

I'd give away any of my pets to a good home for free. I'd miss them, but there's just so many more where they came from. The need greatly exceeds the demand. Put a bowl of food in front of your house, and you'll have a cat in short order... Or maybe a dog. Not that I'd recommend doing that. People are incredibly irresponsible, and dump their pets all the time. All too often they have a terrible time trying to make it on their own, and the results can be horrific to see. And if they weren't fixed, then the problem balloons out of control.

Everyone should spay/neuter all their pets, just as soon as humanly possible. And it's a good idea to get chips implanted, too, so if they do get lost they can be traced back to you and returned.

I've never tried to get a cat/dog, they all just show-up. On the off chance I ended up without any pets left, and no strays around for a while, I'd just take a trip to the city pound and pick-up one of the animals that has been living in a tiny cage and hasn't been lucky enough to find a home.

People are just terrified of the word "radiation" because they don't really know what it means, and remember those scary alpha/beta/gamma particles.

Meanwhile, light bulbs emit huge amounts of radiation... Probably more (over the course of a day) than your microwave, and without any shielding! Yet nobody is scared of reading lamps... Perhaps because it's extremely uncommon to call it "light radiation", unlike microwaves.

Meanwhile, the NY Times in the 1920s called Robert Goddard a fool, claimed rockets can't possibly function in outer space, and only issued a correction some ~50 years later after the successful Apollo 11 moon landing...

http://www.popsci.com/military-aviation-amp-space/article/2009-07/new-york-times-nasa-youre-right-rockets-do-work-space

Still better than Twilight...