That's not a good reason for a notability test. That's a good reason to throw out articles without good references, which Wikipedia should be doing anyway. If I were to add a page about me, I couldn't source it, since AFAIK I've not been present in any sort of mainstream media in any significant role.

I rather enjoy having a source where I can look up TV show episodes and warships and mathematical terms and things like that. There's an immense amount of WIkipedia I'm never going to see, so why should I care if there's twice as much?

I believe Bugs Bunny used "nimrod" as an insult in the same scene as "What a maroon!". My guess is that it was intended facetiously and got picked up as if it were intended literally. Sort of the linguistic analog as basing an article on something from the Onion.

The vast majority of smart people who intensively study such things say that the climate is changing, the planet is warming up, and it's mostly due to burning fossil fuels. You're at liberty to study what you like to confirm this.

I'd call any process that raised CO2 from 280ppm to 400ppm climate engineering. Why is any other form objectionable?

Not to mention that "not acting" and continuing to raise atmospheric CO2 is actually acting, and problems are usually easier to solve before they get really bad.

Well, Anonymous Coward, do you want to own up to all the incredibly stupid posts under your username?

Unions vary widely. Some form around those hired, and aren't any sort of employment filter. Some try to control who works.

Also, businesses in the US go to considerable lengths to avoid competition, including setting up artificial barriers to entry and attempting price-fixing. Why shouldn't workers get some protection from competition?

Remember the Mariel boat lift, when Castro got rid of problem people by pushing them off on the US? There were a fair number of them in the Minneapolis area that summer, and my wife found them mildly obnoxious. Then winter came. Keeps the bugs down, also.

Of course, now that I'm getting older, every winter I think about moving.

There's one thing C# has that C++ doesn't: easy parsing. That leads to a lot of good things.

Not that I want to use C# when I can use C++, but that's me.

Depends. C++, properly taught, isn't a bad beginners' language. However, as far as I can see, it's not usually properly taught.

If you're going to concentrate on the C aspects, and use C-style strings and arrays and such, teach C. Don't encourage people to use such things in C++.

Nope. Your $230 would have to be divided somehow and sent to the various web sites you go to. This means that, instead of clickbait to get you to a page with ads on it so the site gets paid for the ads, there'd be clickbait to get you to a page where the site would be paid directly.

Your experience was not universal. Trust me.

What's the difference?

What matters to Microsoft is Windows sales per unit time. These are cut down for several reasons. First, computers are lasting longer. There are no longer massive improvements in performance in a few years, and so the number of replacements sold is down. Second, lots of people don't really need Windows, but can get by just fine with tablets and Chromebooks and such. Third, and this is probably minor, Windows 8 bombed because Microsoft insisted on pushing a crappy UI on it.

It isn't enough to simply look at the world as is. You must consider the world with universal deployment of kill switches and fully understand likely consequences as much as possible.

Yup. It isn't that bad. The addition of kill switches (to phones that don't already have them) isn't going to contribute significantly to possible oppression.

Stolen phones can be taken apart and sold for parts... Thieves doing this may well end up making more money than phone as a whole can be sold in an underground market.

Which doesn't seem to happen. iPhone thefts dropped after Apple introduced a kill switch. Lots of places have killable phones, and have found that thefts go down. This does appear to be an effective anti-crime measure, and that is good. That's empirical evidence, and I'm giving that a greater weight than your theorizing.

Note that phone thefts tend to be the snatch-and-grab type, not the holdup type. Holdups have a good many more dangers, and making them longer by interrogating the victim for credentials makes them more risky. Also, we don't have to wipe out phone thefts as a practice for such a measure to be good.

As far as cross-country driving went....

Shortly before WWII, the Army told a colonel to take a road convoy across the US and report how it went. The applicable word is "badly". Roads didn't connect up in any sensible fashion, weren't reliable, etc.

During WWII, this particular colonel had a really impressive career, getting multiple promotions. After WWII, when former colonel Eisenhower became president he started the Interstate highways as a defense program.

I'd bet that all cell towers have legally-mandated abilities to shut down for normal calls, and only respond to 911 calls and government emergency communications. I'm still not seeing remote bricking as particularly useful for a police state.

What would this accomplish that shutting off the cell towers wouldn't?