They have been having decreases in their ability to grow food, so yes they absolutely want Ukraine. You really think people around here know dick.

I have overly expensive cable internet already, I don't need to also pay for CATV.

I got a Google TV because I knew it would have the best app support. Looks like you didn't.

My desktop TV-used-as-Monitor has stupid LG WebOS, but I also don't need a TV-specific app since my desktop is connected to it and I don't connect the TV to the network, only HDMI.

Most iPhone owners didn't buy them outright.

Good joke, but you left out the balloon. The $207-billion balloon?

Just using the number from the story. The actual AI balloon is MUCH bigger than that.

World trade was headed to destruction. Now it's just heading there a bit quicker.

Because that will not pacify the poor. Printing money constantly will cause monetary inflation, so only the rich will be able to buy anything of significant value like homes. You'd have to also give away housing. It makes much more sense just to take the money from the rich and give it to the poor, the rich will end up with it again anyway.

Mostly the ACK, but I largely see it as a motivational problem. The people who want money are strongly motivated and the people who just want to get along or even just want to help other people are relatively weakly motivated. It sort of worked when their ambitions for more money were sane, but at this point they have fallen off the edge of insanity.

Leading to my (crazy) conclusion of the incommensurables:

infinity << money << time << infinity

It's not wrong to say that America is largely at fault. We got Ukraine to give up nukes in exchange for vague and non-binding promises that we would protect them from Russia. Obviously this is a deal they should not have taken, but it was our sleazy idea.

I buy from AliExpress all the time. (Same business, different storefront.) As a rule they are roughly as responsive as Amazon. Shipping takes longer but prices are much better. Pretty much all the cheap crap on Amazon comes from them and it's much cheaper from the source. So far they have processed all of my complaints gracefully.

Thanks for the clarification.

(More typos, however. Tends to make it harder to read your intentions and might even encourage some people to discount your comments.)

My main delusion remains solutions. For example, what if negative moderation reduced the moderator's likelihood of getting more mod points to squander in driving the mood into the mud? More difficult to implement, but comments with constructive suggestions or encouragement should make it more likely that identity will receive mod points to bestow. I think it would be nice to lighten the mood around here. (Then again, perhaps dark moods are the only reasonable reactions to the age of Donaldian Decadence?)

Right, I didn't. Apparently ditto the moderators.

And you didn't motivate any curiosity, then or now.

I agree that's the main problem in this context, but there are other large ones of course. The nuclear isn't just a problem in construction, it's also a problem in maintenance, and in decommissioning. Nuclear is also not cheaper than fossil fuels if you consider full lifecycle costs of operation. You might say it's cheaper because it's possible to contain the waste and that's not possible for fossil fuels, but fossil fuels shouldn't actually even be in the running.

Sure do :) I can provide more if you want, but start there, as it's a good read. Indeed, blind people are much better at understanding the consequences of colours than they are at knowing what colours things are..