"Australians really are about to start paying more for digital services " they already pay more because it cost a horrendous amount of money to shift bit through the ocean apparently.

Firstly there is no "unproven" or "proven" theory in science. There are evidence for a theory or not. Secondely it is intrinsic in the nature of model to be an idealisation. We can't frigging model every molecule path or even every 1 liter of air over the earth to model climate. And there is the noise problem. In fact *all* physic problem beyond the two body problem are approximation. The question is : are those approximation good or bad ? Are the model representing sufficiently reality to allow a prediction or not. Scientific have presented enough evidence that the model they had represented temperature evolution enough to be a model representing enough of the reality to be used for prediction. Denier have nothing except "science is not perfect blahblahblah" and "scientist get money too ! blah blahlbha". And this is the point which is pathetic. Curiously it seems to happen far more often in the anglo saxon world (USA, australia, UK, etc...), than for example western latin and germanic europe.

As for that tidbit : " Human-made global warming: every sensible man should consider this a wild speculation at the moment".
Hu. no. We have evidence of anthropogenic global warming. It is much more than wild speculation. On the other hand "sun provocate GW" or "it is the vulcanoe" or "the model are all wrong" are BS which do not rise above speculation or terrible misudnerstanding of science.

I would not worry much until the conseil constitutionnel has a look. IIRC the council CAN also look *before* the law get into action, after it was voted as raised by various political organs. So it could very well be that the law will be rejected by the constitutional council if raised by some institution (IIRC, only 60 parliament vote are necessary to check constitutionality, less than was in rejection of the law - 86). Otherwise the process is the same afterward , it go to a higher court in case of judgement, and can be set before the council by a high court for example. Anyway I find it an utter shame as described and would break fundamental right, so obviously against constitution (privacy/freedom right among them). My guess is that the law is NOT as described on slashdot as it often happen.

But to be honest, I think there are other CO2 factor which the emission alone do not take into account : the investment to make megacity (beton/aslphalt is not zero emission + construction etc...) and the transport of food and water from far flung place to feed the megacity. by concentrating population, you also concentrate pollution, epidemics, and local water consumption. Factors which could be very problematic especially water.

Looking at the initial source , the DoE, here is what they say about how it is consumed :

State Residential Industrial Transportation
new York 30 5 66
texas 10 226 187
Most of the energy consumption is industrial by a factor 22 for for CO2 emission. There is a lot of emission for CO2 on transportation, but it is unclear how much is due to industry exporting stuff outside. The things is, when looking at transportation texas is an outlier (along with California and florida), despite other state having also a sparse population and lot of commute. That's why i think not all is due to commute only.

You probably meant 1 texan emission is worth 4 new yorker since roughly for around 20-25 million people texas has 4 time the CO2 emission of new york. "01 Texas 656 12.18% 25,631,778"
"09 New York 158 2.93% 19,501,616"
Gut feeling : maybe a lot of Co2 emission are due to the petro industry, oil extraction and methane burning ? Just guessing it might not be due 100% to commute/shipping only.

It only shows that the protocol used showed some sort of effect. The effect could be an systemic error in the protocol, i.e. local de-gasing temperature differential for example improperly taken into account. Difficult to know at the moment. In fact they seem to state now that the thrust is proportional to the phase change, and not to the intensity to add to the weirdness. Once the protocol are clarified and paper starts to be published for others to reproduce, then we can start to speak. until then it is an interesting point , but that's it. There is no "proof" and people claim to reproduce stuff which turned later incorrect some time.

A small shop installing *legal* windows 7 onto PCs would be a normal explanation and would be a single IP with many activation. How the heck do they come to "one IP+many key==pirate" ? A pirate would activate only 1 key. In fact it would be more like 1 key+many IP.

Cinema burned down cocktail molotov in a full cinema in paris. I cannot recall if there were dead though.

No seriously, those fuckers were shot and killed and despite having the surprise effect, and all they did was shoot.... somebody in the ankle. I am missing something or they were totally utterly untrained with the used weapon.

The EM drive is controversial because it was never shown to work in proper test condition (at rest - starting up by powering it) and excuse are being made up for why it needs to be in motion to be tested , a fact make it magnitude more harder to test if there is ANY effect whatsoever.

You have 2 parties. 1 party : the oligarchic, with 3 or more sub flavor : the oligarchic democrate the oligarchic independent and the oligarchic repubblican. Then You have the losers : anybody else.

Crafted by consumers which do not want to be caught in a rideshare uninsured in an accident, or want to get late at night in a rideshare with a known rapist ? The amount of the insurance is really up to discussion. The presence of all mentionned items (insurance+markers+background check) are on the other hand good for consumers.

If wheeler was not using his network or had a poor network, then the revolving door argument is thin or non existant. But on the other hand with highly networked guy ? Sure. That is a concern. People going from private to government is not a problem, heck in a way one of my sister did it. No, the problem is : do you have a big network and does this network influence your job.

I mean if he has a methodology to repair the millions of nerve going through the neck, then i am sure he can explain us his methodology. After all medicine is also a science. If he cannot explain it... then you can conclude yourself.