I have an MS in CS and could get certified quickly. But, I won't. Why should I? I work remotely with minimal supervision. Why tolerate the extreme schedule rigidty, interacting with unruly children, and getting called scum by a large proportion of the population, for a 75% cut in pay?

The number of cars produced won't change much. There will be fewer cars much more intensely used and therefore replaced far more often.

This is pointless until technology to protect astronauts from radiation appears. No one will walk on Mars any time soon.

Or I should say, new Model Ts were more expensive thsn two horses plus a cart.

I get the drift but your history is off. 1923 was well into the automotive age. Four years later the Model T would cease production. By 1923 horses had disappeared for personal transportation as they were more expensive than new Model Ts.

> Why wasn't this caught in peer review? Because that's not the purpose of peer review. Peer reviewers solely work on a charitable basis and only spend a few hours on any one article. They look for issues like logical flaws, bad grammar, and obvious non-proficiency. In-depth analysis is for the readership who has the resources to check results. Journals communicate findings. They make no guarantees about correctness. They don't have the resources for that.

> and then "no comment" as to how the thing passed peer review to begin with. Because there's no need. Peer reviewers don't go in depth and rarely reproduce results. They only check to see if articles meet quality and and interest hurdles. Reproducing results and rooting out fraud is the job of the readers. Peer reviewers are unpaid volunteers doing a thankless, uncredited job for the benefit of their field. If a peer reviewer were hassled aboput their judgements they'd just quit.

Bill Watterson suffered extreme burn out, and instead of letting quality slip, he ended Cal in and Hobbes. He made the right decision rather than jumping the shark.

The expected return in Vegas is always negative in normal circumstances.

Actually population growth is the single biggest contributor to climate change.

Assuming you don't have a family.

Too bad concentrated solar power remains expensive, this seems a good environment for it.

Trains can't become bombs with selectable targets.

" They've all basically hit the brick wall of Google suggesting that at their scale, nothing can be done about such "edge" cases" Economies of scale would make it easier, not more difficult. That's how FB can moderate it's content. The problem is Google's parasitic business model.

I bought Intelliision cartridges in 1980 for $45 a pop. That's $165 now.