The real myth is that you believe that solar actually produces more power than goes into its production. You're ignoring the mining of rare-earth elements for the PV sensors, the materials for the metal and glass that go into its frame, and the electronics that regulate power production and enable power delivery to a battery or directly to an inverter. The production of all of those things needs to be considered in the manufacturing process of making solar panels. It's ludicrously energy expensive, toxic to the environment from the get-go, and will never replace nuclear (or even natural gas) in terms of sheer output.

Or, it could be:

> Binance said BUSD is issued and owned by Paxos, and it only licenses its brand. "We will continue to monitor the situation," it said in a statement.

For me, it's either music I like on an ad-free service (like Amazon Music) or stuff I've downloaded or podcasts through an app of my choice. I have maybe 6 podcasts I care about, and a dozen others I can listen to or not. Most are long format (an hour or more) which is perfect for the drive to/from work.

As for those bemoaning most podcasters elucidating on things that they aren't "experts" on...well, that's public discourse at large. Whether or not I'm listening to an "expert", I'm listening to someone discuss something that is a passion for them. Most likely if they are worth listening to they'll have put in the effort to educate themselves on a topic. Those who don't are very easy to spot and just ignore.

Because they are unsuitable and unsustainable. It costs more energy to produce solar panels (not to mention the often harmful mining of rare earth minerals for the PV sensors) and wind turbines (which are impractical to service or repair, so once damaged they are simply replaced, using up more resources). Wind and solar are a boondoggle.

You can still insert images without an Internet connection so your statement is patently false.

Source: Am an Office 365 user.

You can actually choose to insert your own from your computer or use another search provider I think. I subscribe to Office 365 for Business and have used the clip art search exactly once, switching to using Google via Chrome after a few minutes of a fruitless search of the Bing results (plenty of good results, just didn't find what I wanted).

My apologies then.

I'm not sure you actually understand the concepts you are talking about.

Dealerships do not create competition. A more apt example of monopolistic practices would be if Ford bought out all the other car manufacturers, thus eliminating competition. Ford selling directly to the public would be a cost-savings benefit, and buying from a dealer would have to show some added value to justify doing so.

Have you never bought something 'factory direct' or 'wholesale'? Why would it be okay to get food, lumber, or other things (raw material or finished product) direct from a manufacturer but not motor vehicles?

Maybe it's just a statement of fact that we do remember that time? For it to be an order 'You' would have to be the understood subject if I'm not mistaken. Unfortunately the sentence in question is hardly understandable as to its intent.

My telco/ISP/tv provider has told me that for them to participate in the live stream verification, NBC was going to require them to raise the TV rates for all of their customers, regardless of who opted to sign-up for the live stream.

I wish I could vote up your comment, AC, for it is very true. Bend over and smile indeed.

The thing is, Charter doesn't even offer service out this way. I'm calling my telco (also my paid tv and fiber provider) to see how I can get live-stream access.

I have paid cable TV but not through Comcast or Charter. How will their scheme work for people who have alternates to Comcast, Charter, Dish, or DirecTV?

People can refuse to engage in something they know is unethical or immoral, to hell with C level execs. Refusing to do it will come with consequences, but I'd rather have an empty belly then a troubled conscience.

You'll probably hear many arguments, either for the developers (which I fully support), to the user (buyer beware), and even some for government enforcement.

I think in this case, only the first two are true:

Developers, I think, have a responsibility of accurately representing the capabilities of their software and not artificially inflating the capabilities of the software (or a phone) past what is 100% true and accurate. However, users also burden the responsibility of doing at least some basic research and taking a common sense approach as to what is truly adequate for a purpose. The government shouldn't interfere at all in an ideal situation, however that will never exist because people - if unrestrained - tend toward what we'd call uncivilized behavior because of lack of threat of immediate consequence.