I do have reservations about driverless cars but I can see the potential benefits as well. My main concern, and one I've yet to see sufficiently well answered, is what happens when accidents do occur and that they are the fault of car or its software? Who's liable? If its my car, I've not driving, I've had the car properly serviced so surely its not my fault.
I feel obliged to mention that the newest generation of hypercars are hybrids with relatively modest electric-only modes and in reality use the electric motors to support the ICE.
The problem here is that there probably are some legitimate reasons to be concerned whilst others you can probably ignore. There is no doubt in my mind that the energy providers will ultimately find a way to exploit smart meters to their advantage. For me, I hope that I will improve my efficiency and increase my self sufficiency through improved insulation and home generation such that the providers will become increasingly irrelevant. Granted this is not something everyone can achieve although I imagine most would aspire to it. However, the hope is that a prevalence of alternatives plus a diverse market will keep the providers in check.
Being worried about RF radiation is probably nonsense but I've seen it tends to be a common policy of those who want to convince people that there is an overwhelming reason to oppose something. Not just one or two arguments but a significant list of reasons, many of which are untrue.
For me, both Sputnik and the Moon landings are of equal importance. The Viking landings are also high on the list as are the amazing discoveries of ther above mentioned robot missions. The moone landings got a lot of publicity during the cold war and I think that has caused bias in many peoples impressions.
This thing is a suborbital. It's not going to space.
I don't think anyone is claiming it was going to.
The name "space shuttle" does imply it will be going into space.
What concerns me more though is that the debate continues. Regardless of whether humans or nature are responsible or a combination of the two, the reality is that the climate is changing. If we assume for a moment that humans are not responsible, are we really prepared to accept the climate changing. If it continues to change in this way, we are going to be seeing more extreme weather and we are going to see higher sea levels. This seems indisputable to me. So, sit back and do nothing if humans didn't cause it and do something if we did? That seems utterly mad to me.
Don't misunderstand, I realize there are dangers in deciding that we do want to try and improve the climate but it seems to me that that is the debate we should be having as well.
Make headway at work. Continue to let things deteriorate at home.