I worked for a company which used a card auto-updater feature. Only thing is, it would only update if the expiration date changed. I know my bank keeps the same number when the old card expires; they only change the card number if the card is lost or stolen.

I live in a different state, but I find $2,500 / month for electricity outrageous; that's more than my mortgage. During the hottest month or two of the year my city utility bill (electricity, water, sewer, garbage pickup) crosses $200. When looking at solar three years ago, my calculations indicated I would hit the break even point after 10 years. Of course I don't pay 20 cents per kilowatt hour (I hope that was a typo in the summary).

CNN is biased in favor of Democrats:

• AllSides gives CNN online news a bias rating of Lean Left. "CNN, its employees, and its content are commonly associated with liberal media bias". CNN Fact Check also has left bias.
• Ad Fontest Media rates CNN.com as "Skews Left".
• Biasly says their AI rates CNN as "Very Liberal" but gave an analyst score of "Somewhat liberal". The author bias is listed as "Moderately liberal"
• Media Bias Fact Check sums it up as "Overall, we rate CNN moderately left-center based on editorial positions by TV hosts that consistently favor the left, while straight news reporting falls just left of center through bias by omission. We also rate them as Mostly Factual in reporting rather than high due to two failed fact checks in the last five years." Another excerpt states "Editorially, CNN's programming favors the left. For example, a typical panel discussion will feature 4 to 8 guest commentators, one being a Republican, such as S.E. Cupp or Ana Navarro. This creates a situation where left-leaning voices drown out the right."

I won't argue the graces of Fox News because its bias is well-known.

The law firm deals with divorces. After the couple has everything sorted out (who gets what, how much is alimony, etc), then it is submitted. In this case, a couple was still going through the process of splitting assets (or maybe seeing if reconciliation was still possible) when an employee accidentally submitted the case as being finalized.

I would have thought an in-person session would be required to avoid a fat-fingered mistake like this.

You point to an opinion piece on CNN to prove that Republicans want to get rid of no fault divorce? Then you build a straw man that a victim of abuse wouldn't be able to file for divorce because no fault divorce would be illegal? First off, I would be skeptical of CNN understanding what Republicans want. They are as far biased in favor of Democrats as Fox News is biased in favor of Republicans. It is an opinion piece.

Secondly, no-fault divorce is when neither spouse wishes to name a specific culpable act / trait of their partner. Spousal abuse would definitely be culpable and grounds for divorce - even if no-fault divorce was illegal.

I am a Conservative, but have a hard time supporting the label of Republican. In an ideal world, divorce would only take place in serious circumstances. Let no man tear apart that which God has joined (paraphrase of Matthew 19:6). We do not live in a perfect world, so the Lord described to Moses under what circumstances divorce would be allowed under the Mosaic Law (Deuteronomy 24).

Ranked choice can lead to non-deterministic outcomes. I've also seen my own state move to something they call ranked choice, but really is a different beast. In my state, they see if any candidate wins a majority in the first choice. Then the first choice is ignored and compare all the second choice, etc. The ballots don't allow voters to indicate the same candidate in different choice levels.

In my ideal rank choice election, people would still indicate first, second, and third choice candidates. First choice votes would count as 4, second choice votes as 2, and third choice votes as 1. With experience we can munge the weight of each choice level. If there is a tie, have a run-off.

Are you volunteering to off yourself and promise not to procreate? How long would those 2-3 BILLION people suffer before dying, improving the quality of life for everyone else?

I'm slowly buying smarts for my house. Accessibility when the network goes down or during a power outage are real concerns. I prefer things which can communicate over a local network for the few times my uplink goes down. I'd also like to lock or unlock my front door during a blackout.

My water softener and RO units still clean my water without internet access, but give me useful reminders (low salt, continuous water flow, average water usage, etc) when connected. My sprinkler driver has a backup schedule for when it can't pull the local weather forecast. My AC / furnace stores setting locally and can be put in a different mode via the touchscreen if the local network is down.

The example in the summary was of an 18-year-old whose free app went viral. In the USA, 18 is considered an adult. I'm an adult with 20+ years in the work force and I know I couldn't afford a US$5 million bill. Shoot, I couldn't even afford a $1 million bill.

The Moderna COVID-19 vaccine was paused in October 2021 due to a high risk of cardiovascular side effects. After extra testing, a Moderna vaccine is again available.

It costs $15,000 per year to join. You must be a member to see the spec. Joining also requires to agree to some addendum which is pulling up a 404. I was curious if the bylaws allowed creating an open source driver.

I hope my sarcasm detector is working. I don't know who if their right mind would call Trump the most devout Christian.

My dad taught me to pray as though everything depends on the Lord then work as if everything depends on me. Faith is good, but faith without works is dead.

I didn't claim that "first to market" indicates unsafe or untested - I just wanted to show that the first mRNA vaccine which passed tests well enough to be brought to market was from 2020, whereas further up the thread was talking of "centuries" of history. I would hope that if something passed the trials well enough to be brought to market it would mean it could be reasonably trusted (NOTE that the COVID-19 vaccines were initially approved under emergency situations). Even if mRNA vaccines started testing in 2000 / 2001 it lacks the "centuries" of history previously claimed.

I mentioned mRNA research in the 1960s and developing a delivery system in the 1970s. Even then, that's a far cry from the "centuries" of tested history as claimed further up the thread.

The mRNA vaccines against COVID-19 were rushed under an emergency situation. These were the very first mRNA vaccines brought to market. The risks COVID-19 posed were deemed severe enough to suspend the normal testing procedures. It was later discovered that some of these vaccines carried risks - some severe enough that one brand was pulled from the shelves while additional tests were performed.

I personally have lasting effects, though I can't reasonable say if they're from my COVID-19 infection or subsequent vaccination(s). Since I had been previously infected, my doctor advised me to hold off getting the vaccine until enough studies were done to see if it was needed or if the benefits outweighed the risks. I eventually was vaccinated, but still got a different variant some 6-9 months afterwards.

I advocate educating oneself and making an informed decision.

mRNA was discovered in the 1960s. A delivery mechanism was delivered in the 1970s. I believe the parent was speaking of the COVID-19 vaccines which are the first mRNA vaccines brought to market (2020). The 1960s and 1970s aren't yet a century ago. 2020 isn't even a decade ago. Traditional vaccines have a long history. Even so, new vaccines have to be properly vetted. The effectiveness and usefulness of previous vaccines bolster our confidence in trying new vaccines.

I won't argue against the need to limit micro and nano plastics. How they effect humans, animals, and plants must be better understood - especially given how prevalent they are.