Ok then, how many solar panels and powerbanks would this require?

There is a discussion about that underway. No doubt the OP will turn around and spin that into yet another EU being anti-American tech company rant.

"Can't afford" and "CBF" are two different things. You spend your money on the MIC, we'll spend it on our people. There's a reason why we're rated the top in happiness among the west and the USA further down the bottom.

No it's far from the most expensive option. But yes it's not always the cheapest, but that's completely beside the point, TFA postulates a scenario where the cancellations have disappeared. They objectively haven't. They are right there and you're not even denying that fundamental point I was making.

I was in Chicago only 5 months ago I didn't pay a cent extra for 3 day cancellation. The Hilton I stayed at 2 weeks later (the Marriott was sold out) had 24h cancellation, no extra charge.

Only in capitalist hellholes.

Phone books were always opt-out.

If there is something about the working of batteries that can charge on a solar panel -- at night -- then I stand to be educated.

Exactly how many solar cells would you need to charge a Tesla model 3 between the hours of 10pm and 6am?

We will do that when the advantages start out weighing the disadvantages. Being able to charge at home is only an advantage of there's no worries about charging everywhere else.

Exactly. Fortunately many people didn't buy it. https://80.lv/articles/call-of...

Except banning tools used for efficiency isn't about saving jobs. This isn't a zero sum game (in the literal sense). There's not a fixed number of games that developers are able to be hired for or worked on. There's a question of how much of a game needs how many resources attached to it, nothing more, nothing less. Less developers needed for one game allows a second game to be made by the same resources. If anything the world would be a better place if people worked on something other than yet another Call of Duty.

Also it's horseshit to claim you're not a fan of regulation just because you're not a fan of saving job through forcing inefficiency. What next, you're not a fan of regulation unless you support a government program of forced employment because it creates jobs? Just remember next time you hear about unemployment going up while you eat your burger that you're not getting food poisoning because of regulations and that it has nothing to do with jobs. What a fucking stupid argument you just made.

In what way has the market spoken by asking for regulation? The market doesn't ask for regulation. If you want to make a point then you could post references to the fact that Call of Duty: Black Ops 7 has underperformed on release quite massively. That's a market response. It's also an indication that regulation isn't needed.

That seems like a lot of effort. I prefer to simply not read WSJ. Post a workable link next time.

Are you a cat? Didn't think so. I wouldn't go criticising other people for being a catn't if you're not a cat yourself.