PCs have 2 major remaining market niches:

1) Enterprise(/educational) workstations (Like, for doing WORK on.)
2) PC Gaming)

What does it say about us that we now consider "doing work" to be a niche?

But I'd argue that elections in the US are designed to give people no real choice.

It's kind of the same thing. People don't vote because they can see through the charade and figure they have more important things to do, like sort their sock drawers alphabetically according to color.

that magical wall is sometimes called a paywall

And corporations are paying the bills. Just look at the names on the fancy new buildings in every Ag department at every major university.

Please explain how universities churn out paper after paper after paper sounding the alarm on climate change in the face of the multi-trillion dollar oil/gas industry that lobbies hard against said research,

Why do you think climate change became so "controversial"? It's because it wasn't supposed to happen. That's why you have enormous butthurt on the part of the oligarchs. They just can't believe that all these scientists went off the reservation.

You know the pro-GMO people must be right, because there arguments always include copious insults. That's the sure sign of a winning argument.

What they propose is not going to happen simply because of this:

He calls for the state government to protect critical infrastructure and sensitive data, relying on outside auditors and experts.

Outside auditors doing anything in CA government? We'll see that only when all else is lost, and people are starting to go to prison.

As far as bitcoin being nonsense, the New York Stock Exchange and a large bank just invested in a bitcoin company:

"The New York Stock Exchange and a large bank..."

They'd invest in tulip bulbs is there were sufficient suckers. Which in the case of Bitcoin, there most certainly are.

Good luck with your GaltBucks, boyo.

Not all of us are idiots.

If you have to say that, it's probably not true.

Or my electricity is part of my rent, or people in the military who live in base housing, or I can come up with 10 other examples

This may come as a shock to you, but if your electricity is part of your rent, you are still paying for your electricity.

No matter where you live, somebody is paying for your electricity. There is no free lunch (unless Mom and Dad are paying for the electricity, in which case, have at it because your John Galt Bucks are totally going to revolutionize the world economy).

Is there some fundamental property of Bitcoin that makes proponents silly?:

So what you are telling us is that the system is so rigged that in Oregon that it is able to suppress 40% of the population from voting for the labeling initiatives?

No. I'm saying the political system you find in the United States is designed to minimize participation by the public.

I'm curious, do you happen to know what the voter turnout was for that Oregon initiative? Let's say it was 1/2 of all registered voters. Since the election came down to a few hundred votes, that means 25% made policy for the state. This is by design. Even in blue states, universal suffrage is frowned upon.

Evolution is just a theory. I demand it be labeled on textbooks.

Um, it is labeled in textbooks. It's called the "theory of evolution".

A study once found a link between vaccines and autism. I demand that parents be informed prior to vaccinating their kids.

But a study is not a fact. If a food contains GMO product, it is an undeniable fact that the food contains GMO product. The study showing the link between autism and vaccines has been disproved, but you cannot make a food that contains GMOs not contain GMOs

Thing is, a fact taken out of context and presented to those without the basic background information is deceptive.

In that case, it is incumbent upon the person selling the product to provide that "basic background information" rather than simply hide the fact. No?

If somehow the cost of driving went steeply up, you (and your competitors) can switch to an alternative means of transportation and still keep doing whatever you do for a living.

If the cost of driving went substantially up, then taxis and public transport would also increase in cost. At some level of increase, no I could not do what I do.

That's not the case of uber

Why not? New service, UberRickshaw. Many Uber rides are short enough that would work.

It'a no more ridiculous a thought than you trying to create an arbitrary separation between me driving a friend across town and someone I don't know.

since their for-profit use of publicly-funded infrastructure

Which I and my rider pay for regardless of us knowing each other or not.

âoeOf all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience."
- C.S. Lewis

You could potentially walk, bike, take public transport or a cab to get to your clients.

No, I really can't - mostly I'm driving about 30 minutes at 50-60MPH average to reach them. Considering the fact that as a consultant I get paid by the hour it would cost me vast sums of money to bike to them, and probably an hour longer each way taking any public transport (I've looked into that). A cab is not a bad idea if you live in a city but I'm working between multiple areas and also take very long road trips all the time (partly for business) so it would be stupid to also spend money on a cab when the marginal extra cost of using my car is vastly less.

it's not an absolute requirement for your business

My clients disagree which is why I drive to them. If I don't have a job because I do not drive, it's a requirement.

Your argument is way, way weak. There is no "key difference". The fact is that driving for Uber and driving friends around has zero actual difference in terms of external risk or ability. That's the core argument where you simply cannot distinguish, thus either everyone needs a commercial license or no-one does.

Even as a contractor you may not deduct mileage driving to and from clients as that is considered non-commercial commuting by the IRS

Good thing I listen to my accountant and not idiot AC posters on Slashdot:

One way to avoid the harsh commuting rule is to have a home office that qualifies as your principal place of business. In this event, you can deduct the cost of any trips you make from your home office to another business location.

From one of a billion links that tell you how the world actually works

I mean, what consultant these days is not going to have a home office? Sheesh.

Most states, for example, have a taxi drivers endorsement for their regular drivers license.

Yes they do. The point is that is as stupid as it is unnecessary; it's just a revenue collection scheme and has zero to do with keeping people safe (the supposed intent).

The food/chemical industry? This "survey" was done by a University.

It's funny that you think that makes a difference in the US. That you are so naive as to believe there is some magical invisible wall between corporations and the "research" they fund.