I don't think the current CF-18 is the Super Hornet, just a modified regular Hornet.

There have been quite a few people suggesting that the Super Hornet (or maybe the Advanced version) would be a better fit for the RCAF than the F-35.

Why are you allowing unlimited instances to be created?

From the book "Flash Boys", one of the HFT companies mentioned that they were only ever "down" one day in five years. That's not actually taking risk. That's skimming a more-or-less guaranteed tax off the top.

The main thrust of the book "Flash Boys" is that the HFTs get advance notice of your trade on one exchange, and then beat you to all the other exchanges to do the trade before you. This is not normal "first come first served", but rather a form of front-running.

I still consider it rechargeable due to the fact the the main input in remanufacturing is electricity, and that there are basically no toxic chemicals released during the remanufacturing process.

The fact that it can't be recharged *at home* doesn't change the fact that to a first approximation you put in electricity and get back a charged battery.

I lived and worked in Ottawa (Canada) for five years without owning a car. I rented a car fairly frequently on weekends, and when needed I rented a pickup truck, cargo van, cube van, etc.

It worked really well. I took the bike or bus to work and to downtown most of the time. When I needed a vehicle, I rented one. My rental costs were *far* less than it would have cost to license a vehicle and pay insurance on it, much less buying/leasing one.

Now I've got two kids and live in the prairies. Public transit sucks, so I own a smallish car. But I've still rented a van for a long trip with relatives.

Technically it's rechargeable since the only input is electricity. The fact that it's not rechargeable *at home* doesn't change that.

I've seen pictures of firemen smashing the windows of cars parked in front of fire hydrants and running the hose right through. Basic revenge, I guess.

If you know that a new model is coming out in the very near future, then it might be best to wait. Either you get the new model, or else you can sometimes pick up the old model for cheaper.

If someone is considering offing themselves, it might be simpler to take their gun and blow their head off instead of trying to hang themselves, jump off a building/bridge, slice their wrists, etc.

To the person doing the act, shooting themselves in the head is probably going to seem less painful and more convenient then most other options.

If that's the case, then removing the gun might reduce the chances of actually carrying through on a suicide attempt.

How would you propose to decide who is responsible enough to own a firearm? Can crazy people own them? What about clinically depressed people? What about people under psychological treatment generally? At what age should someone be able to carry a firearm? Should they be allowed in all buildings? Should businesses be allowed to deny entrance to people carrying weapons? What about on a plane/train/bus/etc.?

Assuming current OS behaviour, I'd be happier with a ~42-46" 4K screen. Just a bit higher pixel density than my current 24" 1920x1200 monitor, but almost 4x the number of pixels.

With current OS behaviour, a 32" 4K screen would have teeny-tiny text in some places.

The only advantage I can see would be that you could "fullscreen" the app within the virtual monitor area.

Some apps (media players, for example) behave differently when run fullscreen vs within a window. The "virtual monitor" window manager would let you trick the app into thinking it was running fullscreen.

It's just the ubiquitous crappy ones that don't.

Presumably it would be just a hollow shell, and thus vastly lighter in weight than the pyramid of giza.