Just another reason to be against liberty.

And thus have no chance of beating Hillary. Gender based voting is going to become a major issue this election.

That first sentence proves that you have NOT read Laudato Sii, and are still speaking out of ignorance- because just about everything you just said is in there.

Its the same here in Melbourne with taxi licenses and newsagent licenses. To sell newspapers you needed to front up with 200 kAUD for the license. Unfortunately the newsagent licenses are worth next to nothing now and a lot of people got burned.

And a few million other problems that are in the domain of solvable problems within acceptable time and resource constraints. Solve the BIG problem (useful, scalable, humanlike AI) and you solve the energy problem as a side effect.

Instead, Gates is chasing after problems in a random piecemeal way by simply throwing money at them. I hope it works, but the approach is not worth of someone of his intellect.

Took me about 4 hours:
http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/encyclicals/documents/papa-francesco_20150524_enciclica-laudato-si.html

I think if you read the whole thing, you'll find he's a pretty equal opportunity offender, sexual libertarians got a good hundred paragraphs against their lifestyle as well.

SpaceX are trying to do this with a barely throttlable ascent engine pushing a very light first stage. It can't hover before landing because thrust is too high. It has to steer by rotating the entire vehicle, which puts tight constraints on the landing timeline. I doubt that reliable landings can be achieved with this configuration. They may get one in 4. Something like that.

Seriously. If you want a religious pledge, you can do that in the dark under a full moon with friends and family present. I still don't understand in any way why any state government should approve/disapprove of my relationship, or why I should care?

I understand that there are legal issues and there's the usual insurance scams that don't let you designate anyone you wish as a dependent. Anything aside from that? Is this just an insurance and inheritance issue resulting from a bunch of dumb, archaic laws?

No, they didn't vote for it. They employed it as a political tool to get votes. They were happy to benefit from the Koch's astroturf money to do this. Nor did they propose some perfectly workable combination of regulation (force medical care provider price transparency) and deregulation (allow the import of foreign drugs, products and medical services) which would have nipped this abomination in the bud.

So instead of accepting a national health care system of the sort that every other European country and Canada has (and pays for), we got this..... thing.

No, the Republicans didn't write or vote for this, but they sure as shit *caused* this.

Teenage male sees computer for first time and asks, "What can I make the magic box do?"

Teenage female sees computer for first time and asks, "What can the magic box do FOR ME?"

Most males are goofballs. They like to play, without a goal in mind, just for their own amusement.

This happens to be an excellent way to learn computers.

In contrast, most women want that immediate payoff. They don't seem to like to solve difficult puzzles without getting some kind of sensory/emotional cupcake.

This isn't a good way to learn computers. There is nothing emotionally gratifying about them. No cupcakes.

These traits are not universal, but as many here who've tried to teach women software development and computers have noted, there's a strong statistical tendency in this direction.

Not fault alone, of course. In many ways, I blame liberals of both stripes- fiscal conservatism these days is strongly libertarian, and thus, liberal.

One said says I want to fuck who I want to and damned the consequences tomorrow, we'll just kill any inconvenient product of sexual abuse. The other side says I want to profit from who I want to and damn the regulations, I am not my brother's financial keeper.

Both are putting radical self interest- liberty ahead of the common good- and liberty is liberalism.

No, it would be actual suicide. You can't feed 7 billion people in the world without fossil fuels and you never will. It would be prohibitively difficult even if it was confined to the USA. Food is not grown and transported by magic fairies. It gets from ground to plate, refrigerated because hydrocarbon fuel exists.

Given more time, and less population, this could change. Starvation would take care of the problem, and *boy* would we be green. Well, the dead folks would be, anyway.

How is most of your food transported?
How is most of your food refrigerated from farm to home?
How is most of the fertilizer mined (or made) and transported on site?
How are the machines that work the land powered?
How do you, personally, get to markets?
How do you power your refrigerator?

For more details, I refer you to this sweetly over-optimistic missive by those wild liberal radicals at the NIH ( http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pm... ). A grimmer, more realistic picture can be found here: ( http://www.wolfatthedoor.org.u... )

Which has about as much chance of working. Any plans as to what to do with the 6 billion plus likely to starve while making this grand transition? Self solving problem, I guess.

And that's what went wrong with slavery in the United States. Too much whip, not enough bread. And then 70 years later with capitalism, too much whip, not enough bread.

Today we have too much bread and perhaps not enough whip, but what is there left to do?