From what I've heard, that's actually part of the problem, not the fix.
High end chocolate uses ALOT more actual cocoa beans than cheap chocolate.
Cheap milk chocolate is 15% or less cocoa where high end chocolate can be 50% or more.

This is actually the real solution, cheap cocoa is the problem. The solution will be that prices will rise
to compensate until there is an equilibrium. If this becomes a significant problem then chocolate will probably go
the way of other things like maple syrup, vanilla, and honey where cost sensitive places will switch to artificial or
diluted alternatives while people who are willing to pay the price can still get the good stuff.

My guess is that the article provides part of the answer. The need to have scaffolding (and employees) anyways
to do repairs and other tasks so you already have the sunk cost of the scaffolding so the robot would have to be
considerably cheaper or be able to use the existing scaffolding.

As that glass is extremely think and presumable durable, I personally don't understand why a cheap roomba
outfitted with pressure washer (and something to catch the water) couldn't do the job.

I was thinking the same thing. When I was a kid, setting off blackcats (firecrackers) in the bathroom
was not unheard of. This makes that even more appealing.
My biggest problem with these type of systems is that the cost/reward is so lopsided. There is
so much more effective ways of saving lives than trying to protect yourself from a 1 in a million event.
Children are way way more likely to be injured by their parents at home than they are by a school shooting.
A tornado or a fire is probably also way more likely to injure a kid at school than a school shooting.
There have to be better things to spend money on than expensive equipment that based on probabilities
will likely never be used.

As an aside, we probably already have similiar laws on the books. I'm pretty sure you can't just download
and listen to every private 911 call. You have to have a legitimate reason to want to access them.

I think the key is that you shouldn't be able to request access to the recording unless you personally were involved
and/or there is a court order. A police's bodycam should be like video surveillance video. A nosy reporter (or a youtuber)
shouldn't be able to just request hours of footage without a legitimate link just as a reporter can't force walmart to
release their surveillance videos. It should be archived and relatively easy to get to for interested parties but not
the general public. A compromise might be a small screen public viewing room that doesn't allow recording devices
where someone could watch the tapes and then once they find what they are looking for then do an official request
for that section of the video along with what they are going to do with it.

That's kindof my point. "gnome desktop" and "gnome pos" would both be your "desktop environment" aka "GUI"
It's pretty hard to argue that a graphical POS doesn't fit the definition of a GUI. It's graphical and it's the user's interface.

Gnome's trademark is for "software for creating and managing a computer desktop" which a PoS definitely is.
Gnome's trademark is also for "software for use as a GUI" which again clearly describes a PoS.
A PoS is definitely a GUI, a rather simplistic one but definitely a gui. The fact that gnome also runs on multiple tablets
and has also been previously deployed as a PoS should only strengthen their case. It seems very clear-cut to me.

How do you figure? They are both the frontend GUI, window manager, and most visible portion of the environment.
If you asked an uninformed newbie what OS they were running on either system the most likely answer would be "gnome"
though neither "gnome desktop" nor "gnome PoS" are operating systems when a normal thinks of an operating system
they think of the window and gui management system. Yes, gnome is a full fledged desktop environment but that's like
saying I can market bottled water under the name "coca cola" because water isn't a soda. They are both still beverages.
Likewise, "gnome Pos" and "gnome desktop" are both "frontend gui and window managers for the underlying OS"

I agree that if it was in a different domain they might not have a very strong case but a PoS is basically a simplified
GUI so I think there is a very strong case that there could be potential confusion between a computer running gnome desktop
and a computer running gnome PoS. I have no idea why groupon would want that confusion unless they think they
can steal some of gnome desktop's reputation.

I would start by creating self contained units that can survive equally well in the sahara, antartica, and underwater with minimal* air exchange with
the outside. Salt water, cold, and sand are notoriously hard on equipment and if a single type of unit can survive in all 3 environments then they
might have a fighting chance. My guess is we have very little that can survive 80 years in any of those 3 environments without repair materials
being sent and I don't see mars being self sufficient for a very long time.

* the only reason I say minimal is that there is no reason even on mars that you couldn't do outgassing or ingassing of needed or unneeded
gases. It doesn't have to be 100% self contained if there is some way to regulate correctly the amount of different gases in the environment.

Loopholes are only the tip of the iceburg. Even if you attempted to remove all the loopholes, you would still
be sunk as a large multinational basically has the ability to write it's own loopholes. It also has other tricks
that individuals don't have like telling random country X that they will move 30million dollars to their country
if they give them below market taxes. Walmart and factories do this all the time where they will get 5 years
where they don't have to pay any sales tax for building a new store. Amazon, Apple, Microsoft, etc... are
just doing it on the national instead of the local level. The only way I see of fixing this (instead of playing
whack a mole) is to tax them based on sales and employment in the countries. i.e. if starbucks is selling
their coffee in the USA (which they obviously are) then their profits have to be in the USA too and to do this
you need to either figure out a way to treat all the shell companies that places like starbucks create as a
single entity or tax them in a way that shell companies don't create an advantage.

I still don't get it. So a company made a bad call and dumped inventory. In this case it
was to a landfill presumably so they wouldn't flood the market and bring down cartridge prices.
Also, from the looks of the titles, there were a lot of titles. My guess this is a pretty common
practice. Microsoft wants full shelves of their latest OS at best buy so they ship a bunch of
units, cost to them is basically nothing. The ones that don't sell get sent back and destroyed.
It would be against their best interest to sell them for pennies and dilute the market.
What is so special about atari doing it when everyone does it?

Strangely, there are lots of those now bidding in the $200+ range. I was going to post that there is no way they would
ever get their excavation costs back but I might be wrong. What are people buying these for? I also have a large box
of working atari games. You can buy large lots on ebay or at garage sales for next to nothing. Why the
premium? Is it just because of the history?

It's not microsoft's fault. If they want greater adoption, donate them to the schools. If they want
greater publicity, donate them to newscasters (which is what they did). The problem is that if
you give 100s of devices away then yes more people will use them but people will still use other
devices too unless you actually ban all other devices. There are two photos. How many photos
are there of just the surface or just an ipad? You're never going to get 100% of people to like and
use your product. Yes, it looks bad, but with the popularity of the ipad it was bound to happen
a few times where they are caught in the same room with someone using one and not the other.

Just because it is currently only in africa doesn't mean there wouldn't be plenty of
paranoid people in first world countries willing to pay money for a vaccine.