I won't be getting this Tesla battery, for a number of reasons, but I'd like a home battery system. I live in a condo and I haven't have a backup generator. Nowhere I'd be allowed to put it. A battery system though, that I could have.

If I had my choice, I'd get a Generac whole house system but there are tradeoffs that you have to make when you want to live certain places.

If they're hosting the ads themselves, at least it will take care of 3rd-party malware. Maybe. Fingers crossed, good luck with that, YMMV, invalid in Hawaii, Alaska, and Delaware, etc.

Yes it is; she was trans long before she was publicly identified as trans, and you can be sure that she did not maintain a male appearance 100% of the time. Once someone transitions, they want to move on to what is their real life.

Once Bruce Jenner is done transitioning, do you think it would not be considered both insulting and exploitative to make a statue of how he used to look?

If you consider both high and medium vulnerabilities, OSX and Linux take the top spots, by more than a 2 to 1 margin compared to Windows. Hopefully this will incentivize OSX and Linux to look at different processes for development, testing, and deployment.

Thanks. I would just like to point out that there are many different linux kernels. Many distros do their own customizations and patches. And there are many build targets - x86, ARM, POWER, etc. And there are kernels that are hard real-time. Which is pretty neat, and a GOOD THING (tm), even if it introduces even more complexity.

Err... really? Sixty million American Bison disappeared from the Great Plains because they were big? Then why did the passenger pigeon over the same period go from the most numerous bird in the world to extinct? It's true that the largest baleen whale -- the Blue Whale, is listed as "threatened"; but the smallest baleen whale, the pygmy right whale is either extinct or very close to it.

It's not as simple as big == headed for extinction. Sometimes bigness is a factor in extinction, sometimes it's a factor in survival.

I grew up in the slums. Everyone knew an awful lot about delinquencies :-)

Wow. Sunday, and we already have a winner for the week's most non-sensical analogy.

And you're telling me you and your friends never did anything stupid? When you were 15 you were as sober as a 30 year-old?

This is what is called a false dichotomy. You don't treat kids like adults who have misbehaved; you treat kids like kids who have misbehaved. Or do you think that a 12 year-old who starts a fire playing with matches should be treated like a 40 year who starts a fire playing with matches, because in the end they did the same thing?

What I'm saying is take the age of the offender into account in how you punish them. This isn't some kind of radical new liberal idea. It's how this country operated until the end of the 20th C.

Yours apparently has some way to go. Or maybe it's too far gone.

The brain isn't one big ball of mush. It has different parts that perform different functions. You get injured in your Broca's area and you won't be able speak or write. I've seen it in stroke patients; it doesn't matter that the rest of their brains is just good as new, they don't have any expressive language. Likewise if your orbital frontal cortex is damaged or not fully developed yet, you're going to act like an ass. Doesn't matter how smart or well-meaning you are.

Teenaged brains can be misleading, because in some ways they're at their lifetime peak. But at the same time they suck at certain things. A smart fifteen year-old can explain the difference between right and wrong, between a smart and stupid action. But he can't be trusted to act in accordance to that kind of knowledge, because among other things the OFC isn't finished yet. This is why parents get fooled into thinking their wonderful children won't do dumb things. You simply cannot expect a teenager to act intelligently because he has knowledge. The knowledge helps, but it does't determine behavior in a fifteen year-old as it does in a thirty year-old.

That's just a straw man argument. The actual problem with treating him as an adult is that that is contrary to fact. He is not an adult.

In the state of Georgia a fifteen year-old cannot vote; he cannot purchase liquor; cannot obtain a driver's license, cannot hold a full-time job. The rules we have for minors assume they're incapable of making adult choices. It's logically inconsistent to believe minors are not competent to make responsible decisions, but then claim we should treat them as if they can decide responsibly because they've failed to do so. When have you ever used reasoning like that for anything else? I had a housemate once who decided to become her own herbalist. She went to the herb store and bought a lot of herbal shit and promptly made herself sick. By your logic I should go to her for medical treatment because (a) I previously had reason to believe she was not competent to practice medicine and (b) her subsequent actions proved my suspicions correct.

You don't need some namby-pamby PC mumbo jumbo to know that most teenagers have a penchant for doing spectacularly stupid things, but that *most* of them grow out it. That's common sense, and the law should take that into account. And science actually backs up common sense here. Most people's brains go through a development spurt in their "executive functions" (acting according to long term plans, inhibiting impulsive actions, directing attention) when they're around fifteen. That means there's roughly a 50/50 chance someone under sixteen is neurologically incapable of not acting like a jackass.

So both science and common sense tell us that treating children as if they were adults is irrational and serves no useful purpose. That doesn't mean you do nothing when kids commit crimes. That's a false dichotomy. It means you do something different.

Ha. When I saw what I'd written, my first thought was "This sounds like a Monty Python skit."

Anonymous Coward once again proves that what's between the ears is more important than what's between the legs. Last time I looked, DNA programs how you develop - which includes the failure of the testes to produce sufficient testosterone to masculinize the fetus brain at 12 weeks. So, it's only logical to say she's that way because of her DNA.

Now that further studies have shown that transsexualism is actually quite common (between 1:500 and 1:2000), you've certainly run into us - we're pretty much everywhere, and we're not buying into old, discredited ideas as to "right and wrong" about gender identity.

The very definition of a delinquency is an act that, if it had been committed by an adult, would have been a crime. And as long as the case isn't remanded to the adult system, that doesn't change - he will have been found to have committed one or more delinquencies, not crimes.

Even children in jurisdictions that don't have mandatory remand to the adult court system for acts such as murder can end up being found to have committed a delinquency, not a crime.

Some people would say this isn't right - but consider that as a trade-off, juveniles accused of delinquencies don't have a right to a jury trial, and a process with a much higher standard of proof.

Right now he does NOT face five felonies. That's a simple fact. He may, at some future time, should the juvenile court system so rule. Right now, though, he only faces delinquencies. Given that about 10% of the e population has had run-ins with the juvenile system, this should be better known.

Makes me wonder how many non-criminals who have been taken into custody have thought that they have to answer "yes" when asked if they've "ever been arrested, even as a juvenile" , when they can legally say no.