I think most "makers" that I've met are interested in how things work. That involves disassembling existing products and also
creating something new that doesn't exist and you can't buy. In many cases, yes, all they want is the finished result with that
finished result being a robot or other item that doesn't exist. The more tools that make it easier the better. If you can download
a blueprint and push a button for certain portions of the project, then that is great. It give you more time to work on the other
pieces of the project that aren't pushbutton.

The point of a makerspace or workshop is to give access to expensive tools that would be cost prohibitive for someone to own themself.
Things like 3d printers, lathes, etc... and it's general non-consumables. Most people have access to the stuff needed to cook, sew and
perform chemistry experiments. Also most of that stuff is consumables which you would need to provide yourself anyways. An expensive
sewing machine might be something for a sewing space but if I had to guess those probably already exist. As far as chemistry and cooking,
I don't see a market for it.

You're talking about city buses. You can't compare city buses with city to city buses. Chartered city to city buses run at or near 100% at
all times just like alot of airlines. Chartered airlines are the same way. That's the reason certain getaway packages are so cheap. They sell
every seat and know that every seat is sold and only leave when it's full unlike city buses and some airlines where they are running 12
rounds a day whether someone is riding or not.

Maybe a solution to the "ride share" vs "commercial service" would be to pass
a law for what the maximum price you can charge for a ride share. The IRS
per mile number (57.5 cents per mile) might be a good number to use or maybe
even something less like 75% of that but it should definitely be easy to argue
that if you're charging more than the 57.5 cents per mile then you are no longer
in the ride share business but are operating for a profit because "shared expenses"
should in theory only be 50% of that number (28.75 cents per mile).
Lyft is at $1.90 and Uber varies but is also well above the full 57.5 cents.

I would agree to this. Just like presumably you could withdraw consent for your sperm in
a sperm bank* to be used before it is actually used, either party should be able to withdraw
their consent until it is actually placed into service. In the sperm bank case, you might have
signed a waiver giving up your right to retract or it could be assumed like when you donate blood
but in this case they maintained ownership but as soon as either party revokes consent then
the embryos should be flushed.

I see no problem with uber having a little star next to the people that have a million dollar liability coverage but
also I don't see why a person can't opt to go with someone cheaper that only has 10k liability coverage.

If people actually wanted 1M liability coverage then uber could flag those accounts and push them to the top
but most people don't care and would rather have cheaper fare.

I'm not so sure it was Uber and Lyft. I think originally Uber and Lyft probably intended for it to be ride-share where people commuting to the
same location shared a car but the prices were high enough that people realized that they could make a living at it.
If Uber and Lyft cut the fares charged/paid by 75% then it would probably go back to that as then the only time it would be profitable to
take on a passenger would be if you were already going that direction.

Current legal standards are based on the embryo being attached to the woman's body and you have to
violate her person to remove it so the scale is tilted to her favor.

In this case the embryo is not part of the woman's body or the man's body so they have equal right to it.

Yes, women own their bodies and men own their bodies.
But this embryo is not part of the woman's body so that argument doesn't hold.
This embryo is one egg from the woman and one sperm from the man.
It is not any more a part of the woman's body than it is part of the man's body.

Why exactly? Why does the woman have more right to it than the man? Why couldn't the man opt to raise it with a surrogate?
It's exactly 50/50 in my book. I would prefer a technical solution like refertilizing with a different sperm donor but I don't see how
it's any more the woman's than the man's.

Here is another source that does actually mention the type of life found: http://www.livescience.com/506...

Here is another article that actually mentions the life found: http://www.livescience.com/506...

The article says it is harder than glass but even if it was unsuitable for the outside layer, there is no reason it would need an inside layer of glass.
The outside of a car window needs to withstand the elements but the inside layer doesn't need to be near as weather or abrasion resistance.
The inside layer of a car could be fairly fragile and it could still do the job quite well assuming it had other desirable properties as the inside
of the front windshield rarely even gets touched.

That might be how voting works but that's not how economics works. How economics work is when people stop buying your product you get less money.
If they can only get 5% of the population then they will likely go out of business and even if they don't, they are going to do customer surveys to try to
figure out how to get more people to subscribe and start to realize that their business model is driving away 90% of their customers. If they don't realize
this then there is a good chance that some other company will and will steal their market share. Yes, you definitely can vote with your money by abstaining.

That's easy. Pay a decent wage. Probably close to 90% of GOOD teachers are only able to teach because their
husband is earning a real wage elsewhere. Arkansas recently complained that they didn't have any computer
science teachers. Well, what do you expect? Why would someone teach computer science in a school when they
can easily make 3 times that in industry? Yes, like this article mentions, women are drawn toward feel good jobs
that pay crap but most men would rather actually make a decent living than work for peanuts which is why the pay
gap will continue to exist. I know alot of women with degrees that do social work for next to nothing because it
makes them feel good. I personally don't know any men that do. I know they probably exist but they are far fewer.