Yeah, in some of my bigger state power days, I actually proposed banning bar parking lots. I know it's not a real solution, but get people into the mindset of taking alternative transport there.

Well, here in the USA even blowing a 0.00 doesn't mean that you won't get arrested for DUI:

Commerce cop repeatedly charged innocent drivers with DUI
Nathan Winters - The officer, despite seeing it read 0.00, immediately rolls into the arrest despite it being 0. The officer's excuse? "It could have been something other than alcohol." Mind you, Winters was a student athlete who was regularly drug tested as part of that.
69 arrested despite 0.00 in Oahu

Indeed. #6 is critical.
You can get away with mandating breathalyzer retrofits for those convicted of DUI violations. They're a small portion of the country. But I've been seeing news of red light cameras being virtually banned in many locations. Politicians elected for solely promising to get rid of them, voter initiatives, etc...

And again, red light cameras are minor compared to trying to put a breathalyzer into every vehicle. Every single politician who doesn't promise to get rid of that requirement would lose their re-election bid, and they know it. So they won't allow it.

I mean, I don't drink, I've never really drunk alcohol, don't like the taste. I'm also at this point on medicines that counter-indicate drinking. Why should I be forced to blow into a tube or whatever, paying hundreds to thousands a year for the "privilege" of proving the obvious? Nope, I'm voting for whoever promises to get rid of it. Might even run myself.

I've been a spotify subscriber for... well since they opened up to the USA, and I have never noticed anything about lyrics. I only play it in my ears and in the car, and now I'm shocked to find that they actually display lyrics at all. That's the first thing I think, and the second is: what? Most songs never display lyrics when you listen to them, at least that's how it's been for most of my life so I don't even understand what the fuss is about. Do you need spotify to tell you the lyrics so badly that you might be upset about them going away? I guess maybe I'm just 'get off my lawn'ing here, but this seems like a silly thing to make such a fuss over

I like the convenience of batteries. Just good ones, for example, lithium primary cells like what they put in 10 year smoke alarms contain more energy than alkaline, last like 5 times as long in "standby" role, won't crud up the battery compartment by leaking, they're much lighter, etc...

Don't like the cost, but oh well.

Reminds me of the last two panels of this XKCD. Our rights are only being violated half as much. Yay, I guess? Strictly speaking, it's better than the alternative, and yet someone is clearly doing their job horribly wrong.

A car manufacturer can fit this https://www.amazon.ca/Portable... AM radio into the car's glove compartment or its trunk or a seat pocket, this should be sufficient, no?

They have their own communication channels for that.

However, part of national security is keeping the civilians alive and relatively unharmed. The idea is that with the infrastructure in an area being fubar, you can use AM radio from elsewhere to spread information like evac routes, how to get clean water, when to expect rescue, etc...

When everybody had at least an AM radio that could run off batteries or crank, useful.

All the cell phones jamming up duing emergencies and being useless if the towers are down...

Why yes, my somewhat paranoid self has a battery operated radio still.

Well, if they're willing to drop AM radio in order to "save a few bucks", which really translates to "make a few more bucks", couldn't the fact that AM radio competes, at least some of the time, with satellite radio, which over the life of the car would add up to quite a few more bucks, be a possible motivation?

Given that you're talking about cars in a conversation about ships, you may want to rethink tossing around words like gibberish. Crawl back under your bridge, troll.

Mashing Ctrl-C like a maniac during the boot cycle would do it.

I also got a TI-99/4A as my first machine. Fun story about "on the path:" Texas Instruments actually made a bunch of those machines in Johnson City, TN. I moved there in the late 90s and got a job working for Siemens, who had bought the industrial automation division of TI a few years prior, which included the Johnson City plant. I had a desk in a lab in a large electronics manufacturing space that was repurposed as a cube farm and was privileged enough to work with some amazing people, a few legit graybeards and a bunch of old school EE types. In passing, one of them gave me a history lesson about the plant and what they had done there in the past.

It turned out that my desk at my first "real" IT job was fifteen feet from where my first computer was made.

Coincidentally, and not as happy a memory, my mother came down to visit me at Christmas that year, and I showed her my office between Christmas and New Years when almost no one was in the office. She took a picture of me at my desk, and that picture hung in her home ever since. She just passed away last December, twenty five years to the day after that picture was taken.

I was as bored as you were in the stores, and used to go to all the display PCs and add "ctty null" to their autoexec.bat files.

You forgot to multiply that 75% by the efficiency of the generator...

So, first: explanation of why coal produces more CO2 when burned than oil or gas. The short version is, "because coal has more carbon in it."

Next, comparison of efficiency of different types of fossil power. The charts you want are on pages 13 and 15. The data is pretty noisy because it's by country generating, but coal and oil are roughly the same efficiency if you remove the outlier datapoints.

The rest of my post is inferences drawn from those two metrics. You're welcome to dispute those inferences instead of dismissing my comment as nonsense. Ass.