I'm thinking that running Android apps on Linux would be the more cost effective solution.

Does it suck twice as hard now?

A German appliance that's not bigger, stronger and greater than anything contemporary? That's unthinkable!

Don't ban it. Don't tax it. Educate people and you won't have to do either.

Lightbulbs as well as high wattage vacuums are not really in the interest of the user. All you have to do is to tell people. People are not stupid. Especially when you tell them how to save money. And this goes directly to their wallets. Both of them. More efficient light sources and vacuum cleaners mean less power used, and less power used means less money spent. Even if the initial cost goes up you can easily break even long, long before the item expires.

If the EU wanted to put their money where their mouth is, they'd promote the efficient solutions and offer tax rebates or subsidies for people using them. It would be far more sensible than 99% of the subsidies they hand out already.

One must ask onesself, "It was a wrong orbit for who?" Perhaps it was the right orbit for some other purpose. A purpose that you aren't supposed to know, or even consider....

Approaching the problem from the perspective that EU vacuums use more than the whole of Denmark; a 1000 watt bulb can produce 16 sq feet of marijuana, a cash crop, therefore banning carpet in favor of wood floors throughout the E.U. should solve the problem. Especially since the advent of L.E.D. growlights. Now we can either trade that 1000 watts for 100 or exceed our area to 160 sq.ft. of marijuana and trade the problem for water usage. However with todays technology, we should be able to reuse the unevaporated water from our grow system and measure the nutrients in order to re-add the necessary food to the plants.
Just put my Nobel in the Fed-Ex drop box...

Anyone here not knowing that? How often have you seen ads for computers sold as "gaming rigs" with $insaneamountof GHz CPUs and a completely outdated graphics card (quite possibly "sharing" its memory with the main mem)? Or how about cameras being announced to have more pixels than there are people on the planet, but when you're looking for information like lenses all you find is a finely printed "interpolated".

People don't know jack about the appliances they buy. And I'd have to be honest, outside of the few areas I consider myself clued in, so do I. Just recently I had to buy a new TV. There were two in the shop that I'd deem, in my cluelessness, identical. Same size, same plugs (mostly), looked the same to me (they were both turned on), just one costing about twice what the other one did. So what do you look for? What does it mean that one of them has 400 Hz and the other one 200? Last time I cared 100Hz was all the craze, but back then TVs still were CRTs.

Not to bore you with my TV purchasing adventures, but it should serve to illustrate the problem people face when buying something. Sure, they could spend hours and hours to go through various tests (provided they can or find one that is not only unbiased but also younger than a year because one thing is certain: No matter what you're going to buy, the various tester companies will only test the crap AFTER you bought it and of course whatever you decided to get is the worst of the flock). But who wants to spend time studying tests where you probably need a crib sheet anyway to understand half the terms used in the vain hope to figure out what they mean? Only to be frustrated because even after you know what they mean you don't know whether they are in any way important to you.

So people go for the easy solution: They look for something they can easily compare. Screen size for TVs, CPU power for computers, Wattage for vacuums.

To change that, limiting wattage is no solution. What could offer one is if the EU started to educate its people about misconceptions like "High wattage vacuums == good". But I guess that would be bad for the industry, and we can't have that. Instead, let's rather patronize the consumers.

Pot, Kettle, etc... try to learn that yelling YOU ARE WRONG without providing a correct answer only makes YOU look like the biggest douche.

In the times of the internet it is easy to hide failure rates? There are entire website dedicated to the question "how fast does something break and how crappy is their tech support?"!

Also, please clarify: In the first sentence, was that supposed to be an "it's" or an "it's not"? Because the rest makes rather little sense else. If it was easy to determine the value (and hence the agreeable price) of something, price wouldn't be the single most tangible decision maker.

Actually, yes, I'd consider that a major display of responsibility. The very last thing I'd want a rocket to do when it goes out of control is to choose its own place to go kaboom. And yes, even for a manned rocket.

It seems to me only with TV can there be this really common "Let me demonstrate how I don't watch TV by telling you how much I know about TV."

Well, you gotta think most of that is the fact that 63% of all news on the Internet is about TV. Seriously.

You can learn a ton about what's happening on TV without watching TV. For example, let's do a little experiment. I'm gonna pick a popular web site at random, say, "Buzzfeed" and go there right now. OK, hold on....

I'm back. Of the six top stories on Buzzfeed, three of them are about TV. Now this is the front page, where all the stories are aggregated, and I just looked at the top six stories without scrolling down.

There's a story about "Where has Jennifer Aniston been?" which I assume involves a significant amount of cosmetic surgery and possibly rehab. Next is (I shit you not), "How The TV Version Of “Clueless” Ruined Everything". I don't know what that could possibly be about, but the headline is tantalizing. I mean this TV show fucking ruined everything! Finally, the #6 headline is another story about television coverage of #Ferguson, of which there have now been more of than actual news stories about #Ferguson. This is an interesting phenomenon of it's own, with the media loving to talk about how the media is covering something, especially some horrible thing.

I didn't look, but I assume that if I were to scroll down there would be more headlines about people who play this "Game of Thorns" (which sounds painful) or one of the ubiquitous stories about how that guy on the reality show you don't watch turned out to really be a horrible person in real life.

Is this you?

No, but I met him and kicked his hipster punk ass.

I'd have to agree. I get the distinct feeling this is a setup for a spinoff show. I just hope the "build team" is given a decent idea to work with.

You just reinvented the waldo.