Demolishing them would actually free up the land so something useful could be done with it and any metal would be taken to a scrap yard. Just abandoning this stuff is a waste of resources.

It's too bad they can't find a use for these facilities. Contractors would rather build new stuff that may or may not ever be used.

I imagine vendors that have a port replicator (power, display, ethernet, SD reader, and multiple USB ports -- all the stuff that one would expect on a laptop) that works with the new USB-C connector will sell quite a few of them.

Motorhead, Slayer, Brujeria, Assjack...

I know. But it's not so much about "complain about not getting in their pants" as much as the total absence of anything resembling politeness by most people, especially women these days. Oh well, I guess I can always charge up with some greasy chili containing lots of beans & onions to make their evening a memorable one. :) That was usually a good way to keep the drunks away when I used to record shows for bands.

At least to women in any bar or any other social setting in the US.

They are probably going after the users who want more control & flexibility over the final output product that the existing commercial machines currently do not give them. The people that create customized food for parties or other special occasions will be some of the first adopters.

anyone have an idea?

I agree. The monopolists only want the government subsidizing them. It's not much different than the car dealers: the govt has legislated a bit of market protection from outsiders and they want to keep it that way.

No, they will continue to extract it in order to make plastics and other things out of it instead of fuel.

When I worked at a US Geological Survey office that also archives all the US Govt satellite and aerial imagery, there was a memo that was sent out around 1993 or so. All research projects had to show how they were helping the study of global climate change. If they didn't, they were candidates for having their funding cut. The only exceptions were the ones that were being paid by external agencies or governments. So NASA is researching it for the same reason other agencies are: they have some expertise that can be useful and the funding keeps other projects alive.

Especially since the B and the V sound the same to some native Spanish speaking people.

The key phrase is: non-military discretionary spending. Medicare, Social Security, interest on the national debt, Federal pensions, entitlements, etc. are all considered "mandatory spending", not discretionary. It is also about 2/3 of all Federal spending. The discretionary stuff is what most of the political fighting is over and it isn't what is driving the increase in the debt. Yes, the percentage of that remaining 1/3 that's being spent on NASA has gone down in part to the expansion of government since the 60's. If NASA could spend that $18 billion without having to scatter it across a huge number of Congressional districts, they might be able to use what they have more effectively. Until then, they need a better excuse for pork spending on NASA instead of some other pet project.

You can now throw all your piss jugs out at Bill's place or at MSFT HQ.

And they'll pull out a chart or some sort of pamphlet that shows the "correct" way of having a computer set up. Of course this is usually something that's impractical with the desk layout and any number of different things. I eventually got used to the progressive lenses that were prescribed to me, but I've found that for computer work, I use the "distance" part of the lenses and end up looking over the top of them for up close work because that's easier than using the "near" part of the progressive lenses. I also just keep them at work and have regular glasses for home. They also said that I'd need one pair of those if I ever did anything like use a recliner for watching TV. IMHO, they probably look better than bifocals, but they're not as useful due to the blurry spots.