What's a bigger cost? 100 residents in an apartment building? Or 50 residents spread out among 40 houses?

For schools, the apartment building (assuming same demographics of residents, which is unlikely; there's a reason municipalities love 55+ developments). For police, the apartment building again. For fire, probably the apartment building but I'm less sure of that.

likely to be quietly retracted next week.

To oversimplify: Every time we extend infrastructure, we add two drains on budgets. The first is depreciation - basically a way of budgeting for the cost of replacement years down the road.

Depreciation is a way of accouting for the initial cost, not the cost of replacement. Counting both the initial expenditure and depreciation is double-counting.

Say you put in a big box store such as Walmart. Big box stores, as a general rule, aren't the best producers of tax revenue per square foot. You're frequently better off with a dense commercial or residential development instead - a tall apartment building, or a bunch of small stores.

Sure, if you count only revenue and not expenses. But to a locality, a residential development is absolutely the most expensive. More residents mean more need for police, schools, and other amenities. Fire department too; a big dense apartment building is the worst. And it's these costs which eat up local budgets.

Apparently Millenials are way ahead on one thing though. It used to take people 6o years or more to get that bitter.

No, they're behind on that. Gen X was bitter from at least age 11 and remain that way today.

Anyway, TFA is about Iowa. Maybe Iowa doesn't need so many roads (and railroads, note they were included in his statement). Other places, places where a lot of people live, we need every road we have and then some. That's large chunks of the Eastern seaboard and much of the West Coast for starters.

I am disturbed by how many fake rape claims there are though. Something about that should be done. I don't know... maybe its all just media hype but it seems like that has gotten out of control and maybe the law needs to be tweaked a bit to discourage false claims.

My guess would be the more lurid the claim, the more likely it is to be false. Since it's certainly true that the more lurid the claim, the more likely it is to make the news, this would suggest that a higher proportion of rape accusations that make the news are likely to be false than rape accusations overall. (and it probably holds for other crimes as well; kidnapping, for instance)

if its banned content, the 1st does not apply and they can yank it and arrest you. Not saying its "right" but it happens and the courts will uphold it.

We're talking the same courts that said you can't ban drawn pictures of kids having sex, right?

A developer working in Greece will pay taxes in Greece and spend most of his/her income in Greece.

Wrong. No one pays taxes in Greece.

A developer leaving Greece will not pay income tax in Greece and IF he/she sends back any money it is nothing compared to what he/she would earn in Greece

And of course the money going back will be sent in cash or to a foreign account, because no one in their right minds is going to trust a Greek bank.

You know, 70 years from now, they'll be sitting in old folks homes trying to get the codgers off their texting pads and talking to people in the room, for a change, and those old coots will be just as stubborn and self-injurious as old people today.

Jethro(on his pad): Mabel, that damn nurse is trying to get me to look up and speak out loud again. I don't know why, it hurts my neck to raise it, you're deaf as a post anyway, and I know your puss hasn't changed since the last time I saw it, except maybe to get another wrinkle.

Mabel(on her pad): Yeah, I don't know why they can't let us send IMs. But maybe you better make an effort. Didn't you say they threatened to turn off the network if we didn't all talk sometime? I don't know what I'd do without the IM network.

Jethro: Don't worry about that. I had my grandson bring in my old equipment last time he visited. These pads are running on IPv4 over 802.11b on a plug-in router I've got hidden in the closet. No one in the current generation will even know where to look.

It's an art show. The drone was probably part of a performance art piece.

The regular safety measures weren't in place because they were installing the systems, so most likely they had people working on different things and someone started testing their piece without realizing it was already connected.

Right. Standard procedure (not just with robots but with many industrial systems) usually involves the person working on the system installing a lockout tag on the controls, and anyone removing the lockout tag without checking with the person who put it on is in deep shit trouble.

The honest version of the answer to that would be very short. "We lost."

While there are wealthy pilots, most of us are of modest means. My (small) car is paid off so I spend the equivalent of its payment on my hobby during the on season, and that amount will go down once I finish my license. I won't need to buy my own glider outright, but if I do decide to do so, there are perfectly adequate specimens for sale in the $10k-$20k range.

Sure, and how much does it cost to store the thing, to have it launched, and do whatever else has to be done with a glider? I know powered aircraft are often white elephants in that respect.

As for time, I fly one day per week - sometimes two, sometimes zero. On the days I do fly, I still have time to mow the lawn, cook dinner, work on household projects, and even watch a movie with family.

I don't have a day a week to train so I could legally (under the sort of regime being proposed) fly my model aircraft. And they'd cost that same $10k-$20k once all the proposed equipment to do things like respect NOTAMs and restricted areas is put in. Because no one would make such equipment for hobbyists, they'd make it for the commercial market.

Student pilot here, you're wrong. I fly for a hobby and will never earn a living doing it so I have no fear of lost income, but drones are scary because they could kill me.

A lot of things could kill you. Most likely your own piloting, statistically.

Nobody wants draconian restrictions like mandatory licensing

On the contrary, a lot of people want draconian restrictions like mandatory licensing and restrictions on sale of such vehicles. Which will basically kill their use by hobbyists (except relatively wealthy ones with a ton of time, like yourself). Spend a shitload of time getting a license, then pay the ridiculously inflated prices for a US-legal version of the equipment... ain't nobody going to do that.

Nearly homogeneous workforce? You haven't seen tech workplaces. There's Americans, Indians, Chinese, Koreans, and Europeans (both eastern and western) all well represented. Plenty of diversity.