The problem with deniers and the oil companies' paid shills is that they don't understand (or fake that they don't understand) complex systems.

For example, it is well known that if forests are not allowed to have some small fires whenever they would occur, then when a fire does come, it will be significantly larger and more energy-intense. Simple, intuitive land management techniques, like fuel clearing, thinning, and forest fire fighting prevent small fires, and prematurely extinguish those that do occur. So these well intentioned techniques actually contribute to the number of large and more destructive fires. Counterintuitive to most, unfathomable to a dumbass, but true nonetheless. It's all about power law distributions of events of different amounts of stored-energy-release, in connected systems.

As another example, deniers and shills seem to not understand what statistics is all about. They take a scientific claim that the frequency and intensity of a phenomenon will increase, decade, over decade, and try to argue against it based on what the weather did last month, or that one time last year. And they make it look like the scientists are talking specifically about the specific fire last month, when they just made a statistical claim about long term averages.

It's almost as if these deniers and shills had an agenda. It's almost as if there was inconvenience and loss of profit at stake. It's almost as if they were insulting peoples' intelligence by appealing to the lowest common denominator with drunk barroom argument level logic.

Roughly, on the same amount of stored electrical energy.

So carbon fibre body components have a lot of potential to help make EVs range-competitive with fossil fuel cars.

We are definitely within reach of EVs that are practical for nearly every car driver.

1.5x better energy density batteries
1/3 vehicle weight reduction
1/3 price reduction

is all that's really needed from where we are now.

Someone needs to create a platform which uncouples the discrete services that academic publishing houses do for authors:

1) Organized peer review process - a platform can automate the process of this. Peer recognition can be adequate compensation for some academics to lead the review process (made easier by the automation), and/or a relatively small fee can be charged to authors for freelance review-organizing editors found through a reputation network.

2) Final pre-publication copy editing - a distinct, freelance service (perhaps required to be used, to publish in prestige e-journals).

3) Layout refinement

4) Community/social management of dissemination of and commenting on the publication (mostly or entirely automated).

5) Hardcopy publication (if at all necessary)

should read "car maker is released from liability"

So if a car was to be made with Libre operating software, I guess that the buyer would have to at least sign a waiver, which states that in case the car is operated on modified software, the warranty is voided (at least for issues conceivably linked to control/monitoring system changes) and the car maker from liabilty for any damages caused even partially or conceivably by operation of the modified software.

Other than that sort of concern, I generally applaud the good fight for software user rights. Where would we be without this sort of tireless advocacy?

Every Sunday, we had to get up at 11 oclock at night, half an hour before we went to bed,
Hike it down to the quarry. Mine rock slabs with our bare hands,
then break our backs chiselling marks of 1s and 0s in the stone,
Drag the stone cards down to the beach before sunrise, where an endless sea of tiny sand crabs would scuttle over the tablets, some of them settling into the depressions of the marks.
Then one of us on each side of the beach would wave our arms up and down and startle the crabs in just such a way that legions of them would scuttle in an organized pattern one symbol to the left or right on the stones, while another of us recorded the orientation of the crabs and shouted out which startler should wave their arms next to have the crabs emulate the turing machine.

You tell the young people of today that, and they won't believe you.
Nay nay.

I am pretty sure I was at the same institution as you 3 years later, and the blue "computer money" card system was still in place. We figured out a couple of hacks to it, however. One was you could re-use the computer money punch card on the faculty/administrative mainframe after using it on the student mainframe, so you could double your money (CPU time used) if you happened to know a student who'd had a summer job using the other system, not that any of us knew anyone like that of course.

Second was, say it was the last day before major 4th year AI program project was due at the end of the year. Being an AI program, with recursion and LISP and all that good stuff, it would need ridiculously more costly computing cycles than the average program, so.... the solution was to pull an all nighter, never letting your interactive account time out and log out, while the computer $ went hugely into negative (debt) territory. The trick was that the lack of punch card funds would only prevent you from logging on again (essentially ever, depending on size of the AI computation-cycles-debt), but your current session could stay on as long as you interacted with it every 10 minutes or so. This was ok, as long as you remembered to get a printout of your final assignment program code and results on the giant joined-paper-sheets-with--holes-on-sides-of-sheets printer before you accidentally let yourself be logged out forever. Did I mention it was last day of term 4th year.

Pathetic but true. I guess we thought it was ok because the capitalist computing scarcity model was though to be bogus for serious compsci students and particularly those trying to do AI assignments. Now with the cloud (the time-sharing mainframe in the sky), it's hard to imagine that in the short interim period, people had personal computers.

I wouldn't usually respond to such a blatant troll, but the level of personal insecurity you demonstrate can only be the result of being rejected by your mother when trying to obtain milk. Seek some help.

for use of a fast lane in delivery of their content?

That way, they still get unfettered choice of which content they can access. If some content (say, 3D 4K movie streams), requires better routes, the end-user's ISP can offer them a plan that allows them at times that the user chooses to be paying more for having their packets travel the autobahn lanes.

Right now, in the states, there are two dominant (political) tribes, and one of those tribes has very strong (even if unscientific) positions on several of the issues canvassed.

It is not surprising that people parrot the accepted and expected storyline that their tribe tells about those issues.

Tribal following is what people do, a lot of the time. Who knows what they really think, or even whether they bother to think. Parroting takes a lot less effort, and ensures you're a member of the in-group.

But on a topic I'm not an expert in, I'm more likely to believe a consensus of scientists, because I understand how the general process of science and its testing and its refinement works, and I buy that process as the best mechanism we have for getting more reliable information about stuff; what it is and isn't and how it works.

More likely than I am to believe
a) a bunch of self-interested amateurs (or specialists in different areas than the subject in question), for example, those for whom a status quo way of doing things is lucrative, affordable, or comfortable and convenient, and for whom a fact if true would be inconvenient/costly.
or
b) Some people whose methodology is to follow old traditional teachings without questioning or testing.

developed by agent Annie Walker.

It seems to me there would be fewer of these reading wrong memory security violations if core OS utilities were re-written in, say, D, or Go, which have GASP! bounds checking, data types, and even memory management built in.

Sure, there might be a bug in the language environment's implementation of one of these things, but if there is, it only has to be found and fixed in one place, and all derivative software will eventually pick up the fix. Oh and the bug will be instantly and universally famous, because a language is so widely used.

Relying on old C code today seems like flying in a 1955 helicopter. Still works like a charm, til it doesn't.

I am probably not going to hire as a developer someone who dresses like a CEO. More likely I will think "compensating-for-lack-of-ability pretentious person - warning - warning"

Read up on defensive or aggressive versus relaxed/friendly postures (position of arms, leaning too far forward or back etc).

Also, actively listen, and try to understand what is behind some of the questions they ask. Make sure your more opinionated answers are not the kind that risk offending someone who is in the room.

Oh, and as toastmasters probably taught you, avoid saying ummm ahhhh, and keep your answers brief and to the point.