The guy behind me bought his own sit-stand desk a couple of weeks ago. There wasn't any company program, he just decided that his back was worth the $500 to him. He stood almost half the day for the first couple of days, now he sits the whole day again. I told him that if he felt better after a couple of weeks I'd buy one too, but of course, sitting down is exactly the same as sitting down!

They're probably happy about that. They'd prefer not to do business with customer who deny access to payment and who are unaccountable for their actions.

Looking up at the title, I notice that it claims thermoelectrics could one day power *cars*.

Also, power plants use a closed loop, so talking about putting multiple expanders on them is silly, as the waste pressure/energy gets recycled completely anyway.

The same principle apply to steam engines as to thermoelectric devices. Steam engines are very well studied, so there is a lot more data/manuals/advice/working knowledge about them. We choose which knowledge to use and which to discard based on their applicability to the task at hand.

The thermoelectric effect is dependent upon a difference in temperature. To get more power, you need a bigger difference in temperature. Engines do produce a lot of waste heat, but they generally do not get to a high enough temperature to reasonably extract enough of it to justify your capital costs. Thus the comparison to waste steam from steam engines, you can collect and use it, but often you won't get enough out of it to be worthwhile.

Well, if she's padding her boobs, I can see that she wouldn't want that information becoming public, but as the sister comment alluded to, it could just be a baseless accusation without some form of evidence.

Also, seeing a picture of something is completely different than hearing a description. I assume you probably visit the bathroom a few times a day. I have a reasonable idea what you do in there and I could form a decent description of what you do, but you would be upset if someone showed me a picture wouldn't you? Also, you might have a desire to share that moment with some specific people (maybe you're into that kind of thing), but the idea that the person with whom you choose to share that moment has to be balanced by the probability of them taking pictures or videos and sharing it with people you might not even know. Having to make that kind of judgement will limit the number of those moments that will happen, which makes life just a little less fun.

It's the difference between: "hey, Jenny was so drunk last night she showed me her boobs!" and "hey, look at this picture of Jenny's boobs." As someone who likes boobs, I try to minimize the incentives for girls to keep them hidden.

The good part of this that I see is that he is advocating changing the constitution and not just ignoring it. The constitution can and should be amended to account for changing values, changing technology and different external influences. Once you start ignoring the constitution, then what rules do the government need to follow? Change the constitution to what it "should" say, then we all know what we're doing, what's expected of us, and where to go next.

What were the tax rates in 1970? What are the tax rates now? What direction did they go?