I've already heard three rants about the stupid, stupid government designing forms that the smart engineer can't use

What, that's not rant-worthy? I know the tax code is stupendously complex and all, but one should not have to be a professionally trained tax-preparer to be able to do an honest job of it.

Regarding the rest of the behavior you describe - yeah, that's just plain asking for trouble.

That may be, but for the sake of humility, I try to recognize my own ignorance. I do not bloviate about how fantastically wonderful my ignorance is, nor belittle the opinion of people who actually are experts. Not about things that actually matter - ya know, important stuff like life and death and the survival of nations. Then again, I'm not a self-serving politician in a place of power. That's why this kind of behavior from politicians drives me bonkers. Their celebrated ignorance and obstinance in the face of established theory isn't just some game - even if they are playing at one - this will have real, serious, and mostly bad consequences that they couldn't care less about.

Try living in mainland China for a few years, or one of several countries in the Middle East, or The Sovi...er, I mean Russia, and then come back to the USA and talk about the relative levels of censorship.

What, like these guys?

You can point a camera anywhere you want

What is more, you can do a variety of optical manipulations with a camera that you can't with a mirror. For instance: have a wider, fisheye view for certain driving circumstances, or a narrower, more directional view for others.

Cameras are also useful inputs for various vehicle systems - navigation, active cruise control, crash avoidance, etc. Right now these rely on a different set of cameras, laser rangefinders, radar, etc. These sensors are extra components. If most cars have cameras already, these features are easy to implement

Because carbon fiber is not a particularly effective material for armor and impact resistance?

Well, an 18650 Li-Ion cell, of which the Model S has thousands of, is about the right size and shape for an armor-piercing round. (The 18 is "18 mm diameter", the 650 is "65.0 mm length".)

The F-1 flywheel systems have a vertically oriented axis, so that the gyro forces are reduced.

The model demonstrated by Volvo has a horizontal axis, so the gyro forces will be greater and must be dealt with. Thankfully, it's pretty easy to quantify. If you get the flywheel spinning in the correct direction, you can even make the forces work in your favor to reduce roll during a turn.

if that thing were any bigger and heavier, it would need braces to your shoulders and hips. non-starter

Yes, because we all know that technology never evolves. This thing will always remain big and heavy, and no amount of Facebook money will ever allow for a rev 2.0 design that is smaller, lighter, more stylish, or more capable.

I mean, aren't you still sporting a cell phone like Gordon Gekko? Doesn't your laptop still weigh 25 pounds?

So what you're saying is ... "Citation Needed" ?

Our food system would actually be more efficient and less polluting if we could. Depending on the crop, there's more energy value in the fossil fuel inputs (fertilizer, diesel, pesticides, transportation) than there is in the resulting food.

Being stationary installations well designed datacenters could often use more efficient and environmentally friendly options, like flywheels or thermal storage

Except that, to date, none of them do. Batteries are already used and understood in datacenters, so this would be a pretty easy to implement.

The inequality they are talking about is social and economic. The children from well-to-do families always have opportunities beyond those of poorer children. A precocious or "gifted" child from a wealthy family has access to all the resources necessary to realize their potential. Where can an equally gifted child from a poor family turn? Their potential is completely unrealized in the U.S.'s current educational system, even though their abilities could easily vault them and their families out of poverty and into prosperity. Meanwhile, the mediocre children and dullards from wealthy families, owing to the resources available to them, gain entrance into Harvard. This situation reinforces (social / economic) inequality and ossifies mobility. In a country that purports to be a merit society, this should be disturbing.

I don't begrudge wealthy parents doing everything they can to provide for their children - gifted or otherwise. But as a societal matter, opportunities should exist for exceptional students no matter what their economic status. It's not simply a matter of fairness or equality - we are talking about exceptional children here, by definition not the same as everyone else - but of developing the best talent for the good of all.

You can't deny coverage in a single-payer system

Oh, well, thank God I live in the United States, where we don't hold with that socialist crap. Everyone knows our health care is the best in the world. [/sarcasm]

Yes, but every since the Great Depression, when the FDIC was instituted, you could always have confidence that the dollar you deposited at the bank would still be there tomorrow (up to the fairly generous deposit limits). Similar insurance programs exist for stocks - so long as you use a recognized brokerage, who in turn uses a clearing house to execute trades, your ownership of the shares and your cash is never in question. The stocks may fail, totally wiping you out, but your ownership of them is never in doubt.

And such safeguards exist because of...wait for it...regulation.