instead, slowly increase the fuel tax by .10/gal for the next 10 years. If consumers know that gas/diesel prices will go up a dollar over th next 10 years, they will start buying high MPG cars now, or even switching to EVs.

Partner with Microsoft? Sure. Burn it to the ground so Microsoft had to buy Nokia, then make a massive write-off just so they'd have a phone in the market? Probably not the plan. He executed the "We have to get off our current platform NOW NOW NOW and go Microsoft" so well people only heard the first part. But I assume they were hoping for quite a few more converts.

Well, smaller process sizes also reduce write cycles. When they went from 2D to 3D they went back to a bigger process size with less defects due to all the layers. Though they had some controller/firmware issues the first 3D TLC NAND had more raw write cycles than state of the art planar MLC NAND. Of course now they're shrinking it again in the quest for even more storage, but the clock got a pretty good reset going from 1 layer to 48. Going from MLC to TLC is more of a variation that cuts write cycles to about 1/3rd for 50% more space, all other things being equal.

Back in my dad's day the memory spun and made noises. No idea if he liked it.

I think you got bits and bytes confused, pretty sure there's no 64GB NAND = 512 Gbit NAND to be had anywhere. So you can multiply all those prices by 8 for $205-457 for a TB. Even if it goes down to $160/TB that's still a lot more than HDDs.

Here in Norway that would probably be for tax reasons. Since excessive wining and dining could be considered a fringe benefit, there are regulations for how much you can charge the company per day tax free. Those limits are adjusted relative to the number of what meals you've had and if any have been provided for you (breakfast, lunch and dinner is singled out) like part of the trip like on a conference. Some give those as part of the trip, you choose how much to eat for and how much to pocket. Eating a double lunch and no breakfast probably triggered some silly rule of gaming the system either in the company regulations or tax regulations.

Heck, in March the first residential 10G/10G Internet connection was delivered here in Norway from Bayonette, source via Google translate. They have a 24xGbit hub with 2x10G for expansion and instead give you a direct line. Note that it mistranslates the prices, it's 5999 NOK = $727/month for 10G, 3-400 NOK = $36-50 for 1G so I'd call it mostly a publicity stunt but for a dedicated research network it's peanuts.

Now 100 Gbit is a bit more exotic but I know "The Gathering", a 5000 people data party had a 100 Gbit Internet connection in 2011 (10x10G bonded) as a publicity stunt though they never peaked beyond 20 GBit/s actual usage. So yeah in 2015 I'd say this sounds mostly like off the shelf technology, of course getting it rolled out into actual production use is nice. But clearly this is about bandwidth to research other things, not state of the art in networking technology.

It was developed some 20 years earlier in the 60s.
Hell, the concept of linking documents together was done up before Berner-Lee.
What Tim did, was create an open language based on SGML's standard.

Look, O got loads of money from the nuke industry. Why? Because he is a fan of nukes.
The problem was that the dems were opposed to it, and the GOP is opposed to ANYTHING that O tries to do.

Right now, is the PERFECT time for the GOP to get off their fucking ass and put forward a bill to really fund nukes. O would back it.
BUT, you nut jobs will not do it.

And those prices have NOTHING to do with the costs of wind. It has EVERYTHING to do with making PROFITS from idiots.
Utilities through out the nation are adding wind to replace coal. In particular, they are doing it because the electricity is much cheaper than coal.

sorry, but wind is cheaper than coal, and with the next iteration of wind generators, they should be cheaper than nat gas.
EIA, and others all show this. You can not show ANYPLACE where Coal is actually cheaper than wind.

Basically, it is the extremists that are killing America, and even the west.
Many ppl note the fact that the far right HATES science and pick and choose what they want to. And they are correct.
However few ppl have noticed the fact that the far left HATES science and pick and choose what they want to.
Take the case of AGW. A rational person says that the science is overwhelming in favor of AGW. Therefore the smart thing is to drop our CO2 and relatively soon.

BUT, if you run the numbers, you will see that we NEED nukes. In particular, we need gen IV nukes since they can not meltdown. In addition, these can make use of the nuke waste/ aboveground thorium, rather than mining for U.
Yet, the far left fights it. And the far right, really has not done SQUAT for the nuke industry.

Then you have the fact that the far left screams about America's emissions. Yet, current calculated numbers from 2013 show that China accounts for more than 30% of CO2, while the entire west accounts for less than 28%. In addition, China's emission far outweigh even America's emissions. Both in current, as well as total since 150 years ago, or even 1000 years ago.
And that does not include what OCO2 is showing. OCO2's numbers are showing that CHina's emission is well over 40%, and probably closer to 45%. That is HUGE. Absolutely fucking HUGE.
BUT, what does the far left do? They scream that America needs to buy wind/solar from China and continue to drop our emissions. At the same time, they claim that China's growing their Wind/solar faster than America, while ignoring the fact that China's % of electricity from Coal grows EVERY YEAR, and is now in the high 80s.

That works well for 1-2 billion people and not so well for the remaining 5-6 billion. While we're working on that universal language, a few universal "hieroglyphics" are useful and there's no law against writing elevator next to the elevator sign. Like say these, these, these or these.

That said, allergens may be useful for store products but that's usually half the markings on a restaurant menu which typically can be stuff like vegetarian, vegan, hot, garlic and so on. And for many complete dishes many will contain lots of allergens, it's probably easier to use a negative marking like these. I don't quite see what existing use case these symbols are supposed to cover, yes it could be added to the ingredients list but you need to solve other issues like how do you prominently say no allergens and not unmarked?

I don't think it's just the companies that have changed though, it's the market the companies live in. Before there were plenty of fairly sheltered waters, where you were competing with the shop down the street but it was obvious the town needed a shop like yours. Weathering the bad times was possibly more a game of attrition than truly caring for the workers. Today it's all about globalization and open markets with huge waves like on the open ocean.

Jobs are washed away and probably never coming back, the large multinationals that have caught the huge global waves make tons of money while the small local or regional businesses get crushed. I don't think they have a choice anymore, really. That is to say, I think companies that tried this "cradle to grave" approach to employment would be crushed by the markets. And the ones who are big enough to have a choice, well they're stockholder driven and don't have any particular allegiance to anyone so they'll just squeeze out all the profit they can.

On the bright side, they can't really carry on this race to the bottom without actually pulling people out of the gutter. China and India has seen wages and living standards increase considerably, as they chase new cheap labor that in itself becomes a scarce resource to be competed for. That will cut into the profitability of outsourcing, of course balanced by your pay not being worth as much abroad. Because they make decent money now too.

You are connecting a very, very remote area of Russia with a very, very remote area of the US. Take a look at a population density map, there's no cities whatsoever nearby. And long distance shipping will either go by sea (cheaper) or plane (faster), just the maintenance on thousands of miles of rail would kill it. This is as likely as the head of NASA suggesting a manned mission to Mars, it's his idea to make lofty ideas but the people with the money will never fund it.