Sigh... Coal is only useful for base load. The spool up time for coal is too slow for peaking.
Natural gas is ideal for peaking since you can use it in gas turbine plants for peaking since the spool up time is so fast.
I showed you references do you have any data at all to back up what you are saying?
France may or may not use natural gas for base load but many nations do since it is so cheap and clean.
I would say that the engineers in France are knowledgeable and I would also bet that they would agree with what I am saying. Too bad it is the political parties that want to cut nuclear.

"It would not ... as most CO2 is produced by cars, house heating and industry."
Since renewables only generate electricity we can ignore all none electrical sources as far as nuclear and renewables. Unless you want to count the tiny number of passive solar heating installations.
If you look at this graphic http://energytransition.de/fil...
You will see that France gets around 10% from hydro. You will also see that France still gets some power from coal which is baseload power is is ideal to replace with nuclear. The natural gas is probably split between base load and peaking load. Replacing the base load with nuclear is again a simple matter the peaking is a more difficult issue which is why I suggested that France should convert their hydro from a base load to a peaking source aka as pumped storage. The power stored would come from a combination of both renewables and nuclear.
As to your comment about where the majority of CO2 comes from do you have any sources?
My research shows that home heating in france is more often than not electrical heating. https://www.justlanded.com/eng...

Do you have any real data or just insults?

Shutting down nuclear and reducing carbon?
At best you can get one of the two.
Frankly if France really wanted to decrease carbon it should increase nuclear and using their hydro for peaking along with some solar and wind.

" Even if we point SETI-type radio telescopes at it and monitor it for signals, they will have spent 1400 years getting to us and there is no guarantee that whatever civilization was there is still there."
"Interesting discovery, but I can't muster up much excitement about this one."
Really? You are an idiot.
The discovery of life in another solar system would be a HUGE discovery. Finding a technologically advanced civilisation would change everything. There is no telling what we could find out if we could read the data from the signals over time. However just knowing that we are not the only life in the Universe would be huge.
Sorry sparky this is science not Star Wars.

Yes I would have to agree that the S100 was on the way out by then.

Exactly. You have a specific task and probably specific software for that task. If the software supports CUDA then you might want to spend money on Tesla cards over CPUs. Does it use Open CL? Then you might want to look at AMD GPU compute cards.
Do you need a large memory space?
Do you need a lot of threads or just a few really fast ones.
If you have 50k for the system then I suggest you spend a little of it on someone that really knows this subject.
It may make more sense to just use Amazon E2C.

Actually I knew people buying CP/M machines as late as 85 actually I knew some vertical markets that sold CP/M machines well into the early 90s.
Truth is that MS-DOS was not a lot better than CP/M for many years. It really was not until Lotus 123 and WordPerfect came out that MS-DOS was a lot better than CP/M. That combined with the price drop from the clone makers and you finally had the death of CP/M.
However by 1985 you had the Atari ST, Commodore Amiga, and the Mac. All of which were far better machines than the IBM intel based PC.
I blame the decline of those machine in part to the magazines of the day. They lived and died by ads so could never say the PC was really outdated. It is simple math. Do you want ads from IBM, Compaq, Kaypro, Corona, Sanyo, and all the rest of the clone makers or do you want ads from just Commodore, Apple, and Atari?
Pushing PCs meant more ads.

You left out that they failed when they did not listen to the husband/techie/mans advice and produced a PC compatible.
Had they done that they might have been Compaq.

Actually it was not Commodore that drove down CP/M prices. That was Osbourne then Kaypro.
Commodore is the the tragedy because Wintel PCs did not really match the Amiga until around 1995. The issue was marketing and expectations.

Not exactly.
It is pure evolution in action stranger=danger. It is a biological adaptation to trust the people that are most like us. You trust your close family more than your more distant family and so on. The easer to see the difference the greater the distrust. From an evolutionary point of view the amount people look, smell, and act alike reflects the amount of common genetic material they share. So you care more about their survival and they care about yours.
Frankly the fact that humans have come so far in ignoring this instinct show just how important community is to humans.

Then Neptune and Earth do not.
Neptune has not cleared it's orbit of Pluto and many comets and apollo bodies cross earth's orbit.

Exactly ". First, advertising imposes costs on individuals without permission or compensation."
You usually get entertainment and or information in compensation.

I would say yes. Having moons is not a requirement but if you have other object in your planetary moon system the planet is the one with the most mass. Titan is not a planet but it could be if it had an independant orbit as could our moon.

The scientist that runs the Pluto mission disagrees with you.
Pluto is a planet. As he put it The Astronomers should not decide what is and is a planet. They Planetary geologists should.
Pluto is large enough that it has been pulled into a spherical shape. It has moons that orbit it, and it has the most mass of the bodies in the planet moon system it occupies.Pluto has an atmosphere.
Ceres could also qualify but it does not have a moon and is much smaller than Pluto.
I also have no problem with Eris being called a planet if it's orbit remains within the heliopause.
Now the moons of Mars should not be called moons IMHO since they are really just captured asteroids.

So it is better to leave the exploits that it does close open?
Now this is heading into crazytown.