Microsoft has told skydivers that they don't recommend using parachutes, because a parachute adds to their weight.

This (as the advice stated by microsoft) is based on strictly true facts (greater attack area) but it is also strictly useless advice...

A lot of developers I've known had made their first game during Pyweek contests. Pyweek is a free and open game creation contest, using python. It has a very friendly and open community, so even if it is a contest there is a lot of people around wanting to help newbies and provide advice.

But the best thing of participating in the contest is that the rules help you to FINISH a game. Starting work on a game is easy, but it's too tempting to fall into scope creep and start adding characters, places, game mechanisms, enemy behaviour ad infinitum, and you are always starting new stuff but never getting to have something finished.

Try it. Most of the people I known to go into the contest have had a lot of fun.

I hope the power is enough to make all the food replicators work. Otherwise I don't know what we will eat when we cover every arable field (read: the places where we grow most food now, which are not forested, with ice, water, nor urban) with wind turbines.

I'm going to review your physics.

If you installation produced 45 KWH of ENERGY during a 5 hour period (being conservative here), it's average output POWER was 9KW. Let's say 10KW to simplify the math.
Now, you will need 11000 times as many panels to reach 110MW. The total number of panels per mile you need is 48*11000/116=4551. That is one panel every 14 inches (if i got the units right, not used to imperial).

Feasible? I would say it still is, but not as much as your calculations suggested

110 MW per train sounds like too much. The typical power output for a locomotive seems to be roughly 5000 HP (http://www.ecoworld.com/blog/2008/05/23/ges-4500-hp-locomotive/). Even if we double that number, since it a high speed train, 10 000 HP = 7 456 998 watts. It is only 7.5 MW. You could power more than 10 of these suckers with 110MW

I have an easier, better one: executability is not part of the file type. Use extensions to indicate file type (and hide it or show it at leisure), but put executability as an extra attribute of the file in the filesystem.

If it sounds familiar, it's because that's what UNIX has been doing since the '70s