Fuck you.

Show me a car that I'm not allowed to fix, and I'll show you a car that I won't allow myself to buy.

So don't build a 50+ year old design without passive convection cooling in a tsunami zone that doesn't exist in California.

Thanks for the input, but I'm pretty sure that was off the table already.

Never mind that there is exactly zero chance that you could build a 10-meter wide pipeline across the State of Oregon without piling up enough legal paperwork to dwarf Mount Shasta.

Please ask the residents of Washington and Oregon what they think of this 1500 mile water pipe before you start throwing money at Kickstarter.

There's exactly zero chance this thing gets built.

Pumps? Look at a map! Oregon and Washington are above California, and we all know that water flows down...

No pumps necessary!

There's bigger problems than that with what he's proposing here, like the fact that Oregon is between Washington and California.

Oregon doesn't like massive pipelines of stuff spanning their state - they don't even like the pipelines if they get a piece of the action, such as the proposed LNG terminal on the coast.

Better file this under "Good Luck With that."

Well shit, I guess if that 1.5 billion gallons a day that 30 desalinization plants would produce doesn't completely fix the problem, better not pursue it at all. We can't have multiple solutions that all add up, can we?!

Yeah, because the government absolutely did not get paid back the principle, did not get the interest on the loan, and absolutely is not collecting further taxes from the company, it's sales, it's employee salaries, or it's investments.

Or, they did get all of those things, and everyone is better off - including the so-called struggling average Joes.

This is actually a case of "corporate welfare" where it worked.

Everyone seems to forget that Apple had a smoking gun in the $1B+ QuickTime vs. Windows Media lawsuit, and one of the conditions of Gates and Jobs making a deal was cross-licensing all patents.

THAT is what Gates wanted. Jobs needed the cash to keep Apple afloat (which he got far more of by liquidating Apple's holdings in ARM after killing Newton), but also needed the legal squabbles to go away and needed a reason for people to continue buying Mac, and Office was that reason.

One of the reasons NeXT never went anywhere is because Microsoft refused to write Office for NeXTSTEP. Jobs learned from that.

Most of the industrial hydrogen available is created by extracting it from hydrocarbons.

So you can either refine the oil into gasoline / petrol / diesel, or you can extract the hydrogen from it and burn that. Either way, you still are pumping oil from the ground, and still dealing with the carbon waste.

If we were cracking hydrogen from water at industrial scale, then there might be something to hydrogen-based transportation; but that takes energy on a scale of nuclear reactors and apparently nobody is interested in doing that.

I haven't seen any evidence yet that Google isn't interested in huge distractions from their primary business.

They are one of the most schizophrenic companies there is - starting up random projects just to cull them after they actually start to make traction.

So because one wrong policy is wrong, we should make all other policies that are remotely related wrong too? Is that what you are arguing here?

How about we just fix the wrong one (higher-than-mortgage-rates interest-bearing student loans)?

It is the Bay Area, so $892,000 per house isn't too far off...

You may not have come across it in a while, because you don't have a clue what the sunk cost fallacy is.

The sunk cost fallacy is "throwing good money after bad" which is in no way what I described. I was describing "cost to benefit" or "return on investment."

First, it's not my point - it's the EU's.

Second, Samsung isn't under investigation; Google is.

But go ahead and keep deflecting, the good news is that the people directly involved are far more knowledgeable about the circumstances than you are.