And again here.... There are positively charged muons.

There are positively charged muons or antimuons. They do capture electrons. However, as I stated in my correction, having more than one as the nucleus would be problematic.

I also just realized I got some points wrong about the muon, since it too is a lepton. Building a nucleus of more than 1 muon would be problematic. The main point holds though. There are subatomic particles that contain charge that might be used to build "atoms". However, I don't know if there are any stable configurations of them.

(Also, I posted this by mistake under someone else's message. Adding this to get it passed the "exact comment already posted" filter.)

Disregard. I posted this under the wrong post.

I also just realized I got some points wrong about the muon, since it too is a lepton. Building a nucleus of more than 1 muon would be problematic. The main point holds though. There are subatomic particles that contain charge that might be used to build "atoms". However, I don't know if there are any stable configurations of them.

An interesting thing to think about is what would happen if we were able to exchange all the electrons with another particle that had negative charge. The chemical properties of a material are actually due to how electrons interact with each other. There are "muonic atoms" that have nuclei of muons instead of protons, but the electrons are still the same and the atom behaves similarly to it's protonic counterpart. I'm guessing that if there is another fermion with a negative charge, it would behave similarly in place of an electron, but perhaps not quite the same, giving us a broader range of possible chemical interactions.

As an aside from my main point, if something like muonic atoms were stable over the long term, they would make extremely light compounds.

Until I can make Soylent Green from them, they aren't people!

Except you ignore that if the movie is a success then there is potential for Card to be paid for future movie endeavors. If producers/actors get hurt making this film then they will be less likely to associate with Card in the future. Your argument is pretty much along the lines of "Don't boycott food products from companies you don't like because it will hurt the grocery stores that sell them to you."

It looks like the aforementioned article does indicate that videos and music stored on another device would be streamed by that device and controlled from that device. So that answers that. I shouldn't have glossed over the first couple of paragraphs of that article.

What I gathered from the Ars Technica article is that for a lot of things, the phone just acts like a remote sending instructions on where to obtain the stream. If you pass it a YouTube video, the Chromecast will directly contact YouTube for that video and not pass through your phone. I assume it does the same thing for Netflix. I'm not quite sure what it does for video and audio stored on the phone... does it copy that video and audio to the cloud then stream it from there or does it pass it directly from the phone to the Chromecast. I would think that in the case of content already stored on the phone that it will just stream directly from the phone, but unless there are more specifications released, I'm not 100% sure.

My mistake, it's IP-address conflicts that give warnings, not MAC-address conflicts. However, the MAC address conflict would still result in unreliable service.

If they spoofs their MAC address to something on the white-list, would this really get them anywhere? If there are two devices using the same MAC address will either one get reliable service? If they are trying to be a nuisance then you're right, a MAC white-list won't help. If they are just trying to get free internet, then the poor service and warnings of conflicting MAC addresses will probably be enough to make the person move on.

If you've ever worked in power generation, bringing up a turbine when you hadn't initially planned on running it is not a 5 minute process. Likewise, shutting it down or reducing load is definitely not something you do on a whim. You may be able to redistribute an extra load with a phone call, but I guarantee you aren't getting the price you would have if you had set up a contract months in advance. Also, with a dam, if you have saved up too much water behind it, you end up having to open spillways, wasting it. Dams do not simply spin up their turbines and generate extra power on a whim to sell on interstate markets. So save the patronizing "Son" for someone else.

Keep in mind that the water is a resource of Washington State (and Oregon, if you want to consider those downstream on the Columbia). So, the electrical company is most likely required by law to offer the electricity to Washington State people and businesses first, at a regulated rate. Had they known that Microsoft wasn't going to use that electricity, they would have sold it to another State at a higher price (I doubt Washington would regulate the price for interstate sales). Also keep in mind that with a dam, you can't just change electrical generation on a whim. You have to plan well in advance on how much electricity is being consumed and compare that to the estimated amount of water that might flow down the river in to your reservoir. If you are going to sell electricity to another utility company, you need to set up a contract well in advance. You also need to know that you can deliver the energy they purchased. The electricity isn't just sent across country on a whim, it's usually done with very strict contracts made well in advance.

I'm not sure what you mean. Microsoft had a choice to burn through $70,000 of electricity (priced lower because the people of Washington are allowing their resource to be used by this electrical company) or pay a fine 3 times higher. The fine is there because the regulation doesn't artificially lower the price for interstate sales. The company could have sold it else where for a higher price, but due to regulation I suspect they are required to sell to Washington State businesses first at a regulated rate. Also, it's not like you can stock up an infinite amount of water behind a dam, so the electrical company needs to know in advance when its electricity is being used. I'm sure they have to plan months in advance for estimated water coming into the dam... contracts must be issued in advance to sell it outside of the State. Coming from Washington, I know that there are regulations like the one I stated above. However, I don't know the extent or limitations put on electrical companies for selling it out of State. So, that's why I used the word "guess" in there.