I get that that wasn't a rule when we grew up, but how else do you distinguish Ms from M's? (Not to be confused with I's, as in "I's going to the stores")

Excellent! Vanquish the letters.

A job's a job.

There's no reason to tax more than the cost and overhead of doing the appropriate environmental remediation to bring the net harm to zero. Then do the remediation, of course.

From a biological perspective I feel like epoxy impregnated fiberglass should have children kind of like polycarbonate or PEEK. Are they recyclable?

(/immature humor)

the core challenge of renewable energy is it's inconstancy. Physical batteries are a bandaid and long distance grids are a council of despair. The real solution for reliable renewable energy is to just build out four or five times the peak load. Then when it's cloudy or not windy you still have way more power than you need to supply the peak load. But of course this has the problem that you just spent four of five times as much capital. And that's a non-starter. But the easy, though bad solution, to this is bitcoin batteries. Just mine bitcoin with the excess and shut off the mining when it's cloudy .

Now along some AI. What a match made in heaven. A completely portable task. Move the calculation to whatever data center currently has power whether it's Norway or Texas. You can soak up all that excess renwable power. Plus there's plenty of non-real time batch jobs you can run that can adapt. For example training.

Perfect.

Shame the US decided to lose the AI power race by nixing renewables

HA. The whole point of being retro is the hipster aspect of being cooler. But no one can be cool if they are not socially observed as being cool. It's the tree falling in the forest. You are only cool if people know you are cool. Affectations of retro style require humble bragging.

I really need to get some self discipline. As much as I try I keep checking Reddit. I loath myself. The only good thing to happen in the last few years was Elon buying twitter. That made getting unhooked on that time waste easy. But Reddit became my methadone.

I've resolved that I'm going to start hitting you tube for educational videos. Gonna learn Lie Group theory!

The problem is Trump. Everyday I have to see what fresh hell he's caused. Life was so placid when we had Biden or Obama or George Bush. Like them or loathe them it wasn't insanity.

True, and that system does work pretty well.

Of course, it's not the whole story. Vietnam is far from the only time the US got up to some unilateral shenanigans (i.e. bypassing all that nice world institutions stuff).

The US has a long and copious history of invading other countries, destabilizing governments (democratic and otherwise) and assination plots of everyone up to and including heads of state, and there's no shortage of it after WWII.

The outright annexation did stop post WWII. Well, except for a bunch of Pacific islands, which was done with UN endorsement.

The recommendation was not to expose babies to tree nuts in any form because so-exposed babies seemed to be more likely to develop nut allergies. It turns out that was due to recall bias and the opposite is actually true.

Assuming you are older than 25, you (and I) were probably exposed to peanut butter, along with other common food allergens, on purpose by our parents around four or five months old. As I recall (can't confirm) that was the general recommendation prior to 2000. Around 2000 the EU said five months and the US said 36. Current guidelines are 4-6 months.

"I'm assuming any domestic worker at this point has to be physically here for some reason."

I wouldn't assume that. The reason could simply be that the hiring manager wanted the team member local to make them easier to manage and interact with. Sure it cost more than offshoring them, but the onshoring cost could have been justifiable. Now there's a 100k new reasons to reconsider it.

There will be cases where they really do need to be physically onsite, security as you suggested being one reason. Having to interact with physical hardware/assets as part of their role is another. In some cases they'll pay the 100k for the h1b, in some they'll hire an American... in others they'll figure out an offshoring solution, in others they'll just eliminate the position entirely.

I'd be very surprised if there is much of a net increase in jobs for American's as a result of this policy.

I do think there is a bit of a difference between the agenda of a limited term presidency of extremists and the agenda of the Chinese communist party though.

The US has invaded all of its neighbours, most multiple times. Many of those neighbours got annexed and remain so. There was even a whole holy destiny religious thing to justify it. You didn't have to be a neighbour though, the US would invade you no matter where in the world you were.

Are. It's not in the past. Since WWII the US decided all the other powers should give up their colonies and the US and USSR would have "spheres of influence" instead. So not outright annexation, but if you don't do as you're told, more invasions.

It's not "a limited term presidency of extremists." The current bunch are just less subtle. They're also more talk and less invading, so far.

Now?

It didn't explode out of nowhere. Some people have always been allergic to nuts. Pediatricians jumped the gun a bit around 2000 based on poor evidence and started recommending completely avoiding exposing high risk babies to nuts until they were three years old (in the US). This turned out to be exactly the wrong thing to do and produced a generation of kids with much more severe nut allergies. More kids with more severe allergies caused even more restriction on exposure.

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/a...

I think like most others who replied, you missed half of my point.

They don't need to. Here's the scenario (though it requires important details to be ironed out). Say the world estimates carbon capture to equal the current carbon output would cost 4 trillion dollars. And if we burn less, it will cost less. So you simulate a higher tax to find the lowest rate such that the tax revenue equals the cost of carbon capture. Done. If you want the simple version, you can pretend demand is inelastic as you implied, and calculate the needed tax amount without thinking about how usage will change.

If you want a more realistic and complex version, you'll need to find an economist.