Why do you necessarily have to do one before the other? Changing/transitioning the source of the electricity through renewable (or lesser emitting) sources can be done at the same time as advancing energy storage, particularly towards Electric Vehicles.

Laptops, phones, IoT devices, etc, don't care if they're recharged by renewable or fossils fuels. The companies making the batteries will worry about storing the energy and others the end-of-life recycling of the batteries; the energy companies will worry about providing renewable energy sources.

We don't give a second thought to those other, smaller rechargeable devices especially in the combination of advances in hardware & software to maximize battery life, reducing the need to recharge in the first place. I bet if you had a time machine and went back 20 years you'd have laughed your a$$ off to their ignorance. When asked "What would you have done different?" and your response would be "LOL IDK Emoticon Hashtag #PeopleInthePastArestupid

I see cars as a more scaled up version, everything happens in 'baby steps'.

So, what, it takes infinitely more energy for an extra few mm of sheet metal to launch that thing? A launch vehicle the size of the moon for slightly thicker tires versus the one they initially used? Apparently the Atlas V was used, and from what I am reading it is very much capable of launching the rover with a few more pounds/thicker tires and still grossly overpowered to deliver the payload. Also I never said anything about changing the tires to rubber or plastic! But alas I am just a armchair internet engineer. I don't have an engineer degree so I must just be another stupid hick.

So? Was there an arbitrary weight limit? What's a few more pounds for proper tires? Was there some reason that it had to be exactly 1,980lb? I find that very hard to believe. Cars have proper tires, at first what look like bicycle tires but they get bigger and heavier so do the tires and suspension. Buildings get taller, so they have foundations to support them. I think that is common sense. We can have our heavier cars loaded with more gizmos and the tires are designed to handle that and extra cargo, so why did they cheap out on Curiosity's tires? Are you telling they COULD NOT make the tires thicker or use a stronger and perhaps heavier metal while keeping everything they wanted, or they didn't WANT TO?

The wheels aren't in the way of the instruments and batteries. /armchair engineer

Not everyone has access to broadband, or have something with ridiculously low caps and high overages like 4G LTE, so they are stuck using DVDs by mail. So the issue can't be bandwidth 'improvements' if there's no access to it at all to begin with.

Except when the business posts a "No Guns" sign. Some states put their weight behind it. Even otherwise, if the owner/employee finds out (like open carrying), private property rights trumps personal safety if you are asked to leave or put away the gun and don't you get charged with trespassing. The company likely wouldn't be held liable for whatever happens to you either.

I think you are confused, that is from the Declaration of Independence..

Never felt the need for a toy just to browse the interwebs. And it'd be just like my phone, 'they' tell me what I can and can't do with it. No upgrades to newer major releases. They introduce glaring bugs in the firmware, and refuse to fix it because it's past its 5 second lifetime. No thanks, to any tablet.

but you have to put something. Why can't the subject be optional?

'Assault weapons' don't exist. Nobody owns/can own something that doesn't exist.

Mine doesn't have a safety, not designed with one.

They can always slash the cost of their crap. They got all that money from the huge profit margins using the same Chinese labor and parts as every other manufacturer.

I'm confused by your reply, that says they don't want people to pay cash (which means actual dollar bills) not that they aren't accepting USD anymore but so people aren't taking up parking spaces.

To be fair Flash is a piece of crud, on systems otherwise capable of playing videos, in full screen would use exponentially more CPU usually maxing the cpu/core making the video unwatchable in full screen. The higher your desktop resolution the more exponential cpu power Flash required to scale to fullscreen. It could be worked around by dropping the desktop resolution much lower say 800x600 or even 640x480. Silverlight didn't have any issues with cpu usage scaling to fullscreen. Sure they have gpu acceleration now but I suspect it's just to work around that issue.

I usually don't have any problems with offline mode, my cellphone hotspot is my primary/only available internet connection and is very unreliable, getting dropped from the cell network quite often.