I'm not entirely sure tupperware and lipstick will be much of a consolation in a runaway greenhouse scenario, but maybe that's just me.

In addition, reducing fossil fuel consumption for energy purposes means there's more available for tennis rackets. Happy days!

The Saudis would like to do this but they can't. The rest of OPEC doesn't want to and Saudi no longer has the market power on its own. If they shut off the taps, all they do is hurt themselves.

The story here is global oversupply, nothing more exciting than that.

Um, dude, perhaps read up a little on the supply and demand theory of pricing. If the price of oil goes down it is for two reasons: (1) more oil available (2) less oil being used. (1) is obviously never true. (2) is the correct answer. Sure, the response to lower prices will eventually be increased usage but that in turn will simply lead back into higher prices.

The Saudis have been attenmpting to cut supply and hence increase prices for a long time. They do not have the pricing power they once did. Russia is hurting and has to sell all it can. The rest of OPEC doesn't want to slow down. Venezuela can't slow down.

As for produce, I at least have seen cheaper goods in several categories recently at my local supermarket, though the oil price will be a second order impact.

2008 coincided with a massive financial crisis. And if you double your time horizon, back around 2000 oil was more like $10 a barrel.

All a currency really needs is reliability; that it was here, yesterday, today, and will be here tomorrow. Sure, it has no inherent backing, but then neither does Peru's little fiat currency. The problem that I see is that despite all the talk, there's no real evidence of a Bitcoin economy emerging; people use it to settle payments but people aren't running entire businesses in Bitcoin and paying salaries in Bitcoin.

As soon as people want transactions confirmed faster, they'll start adding transaction fees. Simples.

I suggest you review the UK's CS curriculum, and the curriculum it replaced. You might just be in for a surprise.

childish, fanciful and ridiculous dream

Kind of a sweeping claim there. Hint: the 1% would like you to have a decent income so you can afford their products, as otherwise their companies will go bust (like the Romans did).

Or indeed any process which carries a relatively constant risk, accident being the most obvious. Personally, I can't wait for the headline "121 billionaire breaks neck skiing".

Also AI can't currently walk and speak a coherent sentence. I'm currently confident of my ability to outsmart it for the forseeable.

It's a generally unpopular thing to say in these discussions, but American cops are by world standards incredibly badly trained, equipped, and managed. I know UK cops who have done exchange programs and the like and they are dumbfounded by how bad things are.

Well, let's make it simple. Harassment is when you continue to communicate with someone who has expressed the wish that you stop.

What you are talking about is threats, and again the test is simple. Is a reasonable person receiving such a threat likely to believe that the threat is to be carried out?

Because it is an initial study, I would guess. Wait till they replicate it (if they do) with Kinect.

one bonus when it comes to childbirth!

And nine months previously ^_^