We have a state pharmacy database which does that. However, the data is not supposed to be commercially available, AND it most definitely is not supposed to be hooked up to any kind of Federal system.

I have been using Firefox on the desktop since it was Netscape. About the only time I fire up Chrome is to check CSS compatibility in a web page. I dislike Chrome very much. Last time I recall checking, the Chrome executable was about 10x (!!!) the size of my Firefox, and slow, slow, slow in comparison.

One of the first things I did when I got an Android phone was disable Chrome and install Firefox.

Well, I think there are two important things to note here: first, IANAL but sharing this data between pharmacies without any patient input would appear to be a blatant violation of HIPAA regulations. Second, my state's prescription database is very definitely NOT supposed to be connected to any Federal database. That would be a violation of State law.

I followed the "thread 2" forum for a while. It appears that the effect they are seeing is approximately 2 micronewtons. That's a pretty small effect. This comment was interesting:

The problem is that theoretically, there is no "background field" to "grip". You appear to be proposing a "universal aether" or maybe "phlogiston". Those aren't exactly groundbreaking ideas.

According to theory the quantum vacuum has virtual particles in it, but that doesn't make it a "fabric" to grip or push against.

I am interested to see what kind of thrust they DO claim to have gotten this time. And I am also curious why they chose to use a lower-power source, rather than trying to replicate the original experiments.

I doubt the average reasonable person would, on reading the original comment this is about, conclude that it referred to "other people".

I've read the bill, and it looks completely reasonable to me. I don't much care who wrote it; I only care about what's in it.

(Certainly who wrote it might cause enough alarm to justify actually reading it, but it isn't excuse to damn it without reading it.)

No, it didn't. It merely required whatever models are used to be made public.

We agree on many things, but this isn't one of them.

The EPA clearly (at least at present) has jurisdiction over polluted groundwater. That's the kind of thing it was created for.

Industry is not "allowed" to pollute groundwater just because its use of the pollutant is a "trade secret". That's not how it works. This is about the basis of regulations. If the public and "reasonably reproducible" science says (thin air example) isofurans above 20ppb are harmful to health, they can be regulated.

That means they could not be released into groundwater, "trade secret" or not. (Not that I am any fan of EPA... I have had far too much experience with it to think it is our friend.)

That's really not how it is written. I suggest you read the actual bill.

This.

Mod up.

Yes, indeed. Apparently better than you do. It still applies even when the argument is implied rather than stated explicitly.

I know who you are, and I understood the context of your comment just fine, even if other readers here don't. Hey, there's a word for you: context. Do you even know what the term means?

Of course, there will also always be those who claim any skepticism or examination of facts outside the mainstream "official" story is "conspiracy theory". Despite the fact that skeptics have in fact routed out skullduggery and real conspiracy a rather alarming number of times throughout history, and despite the fact that they have not studied those issues themselves.

Or those who don't realize that many individuals acting to the same purpose, in all good will and without coordination, can have the effect of conspiracy even where there is none.

I know you haven't been a student of the Constitution or its history. I have been. You can call that "conspiracy theory" all you like but that doesn't make it so.

Unless you are confusing the Constitution with the Declaration of Independence (which would surprise me not at all). The latter was, indeed, a grand conspiracy.

Take your ad-hominem and shove it right up there where the sun doesn't shine. Because that's where it came from, and that's where it properly belongs.

They've actually been around for a long time.

I wasn't exactly proposing to use it in an apartment. It was just some thoughts about what is possible, not what is practical everywhere.

Not necessarily. It's possible to do pumped hydro in the ocean, pretty much anywhere on a continental shelf: pour a (BIG) cylinder of reinforced concrete, and pump water out of it.

It's hardly compact, though.

A long time ago, there were some experimental buses in Sweden which used a specially-designed flywheel in a vacuum can, with magnetic bearings, to store energy rather than batteries. This is practical for a mobile system because the stored rotational energy can be used to directly drive generators.

In contrast to the steam-engine flywheels of days gone by, the Swedish bus flywheels were thicker toward the middle because of their reportedly extreme rotational speed.